From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Mon Nov 1 00:58:36 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Mon, 01 Nov 2004 00:58:36 -0000 Subject: Ron's bad behaviour. Was: Re: What should Harry REALLY feel sorry for? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 116906 > wrote: > snip. By the way, people go on and on about Harry's bad behavior but forget that Ron acted about a thousand times worse in GoF than Harry ever did, and for one tenth the provocation. > Alla: I very often jump in to defend Harry's behaviour. I don't forget how Ron acted in GoF and do think that was quite a low blow he dealt Harry. But can we also not to forget that Ron WAS 14 and 14 year old boys, even best friends often fight with good reasons and for NO REASON at all. Just as I see Harry's behaviour in OOP as nothing unusual under circumstances he found himself in, I see nothing unusual in Ron's behaviour. He got gealous (IMO), he got over it. As an avid reader of HP fanfiction, I find it very wierd that so many fanfiction writers tend to take GOF fight and blow it SO out of proportion (in my opinion, of course) All Ron's loyalty to Harry gets forgotten (him willing to die in PS/SS, in PoA) because of one fight. Curious, very curious. From jhnbwmn at hotmail.com Mon Nov 1 02:04:58 2004 From: jhnbwmn at hotmail.com (johnbowman19) Date: Mon, 01 Nov 2004 02:04:58 -0000 Subject: What we find there (was: How to Get Through the Door)--SPOILERS!!! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 116907 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "antoshachekhonte" wrote: > > > Dungrollin: > > > > If it's about Fudge and Percy, it would have to have an apostrophe > > after the last s. > > > > > Antosha: > > Possibly true. However, it is worth pointing out that "Half-Blood Prince" was originally > announced w/o the hyphen. The lack of thorough copy-edit actually struck me as > endearing--it's nice to know that what we're getting on the site hasn't been processed and > packaged through eighteen levels of pre-cleaning. > > There are a number of place names that derive from possessives that lack an apostrophe. > (Of course, the only one that comes to mind at this moment is Caesar's Palace, a place that > annoys the heck out of the wordsmith in me every time I get anywhere near Nevada....) > > Also, it could be glossed as spinners (plural noun) end (verb). In which case politicians or > spiders seem the most likely candidates. Sorry to go a bit off topic but, I was browsing over some of the other stuff JK had put on her website in the past, when I came across the hint about the first chapter in book six, under the extra stuff heading. She says the first chapter of book six "has been 13 years in the brewing". I always thought this would be the chapter where we find out what happened that night in Godric Hollow; but, if chapter two is called Spinners End (which I believe is probably the name of a place) then I do not think the first chapter is about Godric's Hollow. JK said we would briefly see the Dursley's in book six so one would think that we would see them in chapter one. What could be 13 years in the making that involves the Dursleys? I would venture the guess that Petunia doing magic would be it. What do you guys think would be 13 years in the brewing, and would lead Harry to a new place called Spinners End? From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Mon Nov 1 02:38:53 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Mon, 01 Nov 2004 02:38:53 -0000 Subject: Black and white and read all over. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 116908 Kneasy: > Spoon-feeding - isn't this what JKR is doing on her web-site? > "Oh, they need extra clues, guidance, whatever on this subject or > that individual. I'll drop this nugget in there for them." > Personally I'll use what she gives, but I don't feel totally > overjoyed about it and I'm not alone. I've had mails that wonder > if she's belatedly realising that she's not provided enough > information in the books that in hindsight could be pointed to as > acceptable foreshadowing or clues. The new information regarding > letters to Petunia being the most obvious example so far. > > If there are many more web-site revelations then it may be > justifiable to wonder if the actual books, the 'pure' canon is > sufficient to enable valid conclusions to be drawn or key story > lines to be identified. It is to this aspect of the fun and games > of analysis and interpretation that the section above, clipped > from my previous post, refers. Perhaps I should have made this > more explicit, but since there are no other instances of what > could be referred to as 'spoon-feeding' I thought it would be > obvious. > > Plus the possibility that sticking to book canon may be of limited > value and that we, you, I or whoever might as well sit around > waiting for crumbs to fall into our laps - because it's the only > way we're going to be able to reach accurate conclusions. Hence > the remark that the implication is that we should be happy to > receive fresh snippets rather than thinking about the existing > text, because it might be a pointless undertaking anyway. And if > it turns out to be so I'll be absolutely livid. SSSusan: Oh, I don't know. I think it's just all meant to be fun! (Call me a simpleton, I guess.) JKR knows there are millions of people out there, anxiously awaiting another book -- something else to sink our teeth into -- some new goodies to add to what we've built up over 5 books. So, she tosses some tidbits for fun. Some of them are pure fun; some of them are things she's likely never going to find room for in the next two books; some of them are clarifications of oft- questioned plot or character points; some *may* be things she thinks will be appreciated as "No, dears, you're going the wrong way; look *here*." (**We** know that some don't care for such tips, but I'm guessing many do.) Anyway, I think it's all about killing time and handing out triflings to keep her fans content in the interim. You yourself note the frequency with which the same threads & arguments arise around here. When I find out one of the chapter titles for Book 6, for instance, I get excited, thinking about the possibilities. Fresh meat! Kneasy: > Even with this possibility lurking in the background I am not > prepared to sit around and do nothing. I'll still attempt to > squeeze as much out of the books as possible - and quite probably > more than many think justifiable. SSSusan: As I think you should! You clearly have fun coming up w/ new theories; people have fun responding. Have at it! Some of us get our jollies by thinking up potential outcomes for the series just from the 5 books so far; some prefer to use the clues JKR provides to give a little focus to those doings; others are content to wait for the answers to come straight from JKR in books 6 & 7 and really aren't interested in figuring out how it'll all end at all. I don't see a problem with different strokes for different folks. Siriusly Snapey Susan From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Mon Nov 1 02:49:50 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Mon, 01 Nov 2004 02:49:50 -0000 Subject: Draco chapter (was: What we find there) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 116909 SSSusan: > > Can't speak for Stefanie, but I was thinking more along the > > lines of Draco's going there w/ the purpose of assisting in > > Daddy et al.'s escape. So I suspect Mumsy wouldn't even be > > aware. This would be a DE kid kind of project. Alla: > I think I may agree with you, Susan. Does it mean to you that JKR > will do FINALLY EVIL Draco, no other hidden depth Draco in HBP? SSSusan: Well, *if* I'm right that the detour is to get Daddy out of Azkaban, then I'd say, yes, Draco will be making his final decision for Team Voldy. Some are thinking it could mean a redeemed Draco, but I just can't imagine it. Very near the end of OotP we see Draco threatening Harry over what he did to his father. If the Draco's Detour chapter is only #6, it could potentially be only a matter of weeks between the threat to Harry and this. Now, frankly, that threat sounded pretty serious to me, and I don't think he'd change his mind and become redeemed in a flash like that. (Then again, I'm not one to hold out a lot of hope for a redeemed Draco at any point in the septology.) Siriusly Snapey Susan From syroun at yahoo.com Mon Nov 1 03:15:47 2004 From: syroun at yahoo.com (syroun) Date: Mon, 01 Nov 2004 03:15:47 -0000 Subject: What should Harry REALLY feel sorry for? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 116910 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "queen_astrofiammante" wrote: > > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "dumbledore11214" > wrote: > > > > So, my question is - for what in his life Harry should REALLY > > feel sorry for? > > > > Please think BIG.:) > (snip) Astrofiammante wrote: > The single biggest thing was Harry's refusal to persevere with > Occlumency - although I'm sure Snape needs to share the blame for > this, and possibly also Dumbledore, for not keeping a closer eye > on such an important part of his overall strategy....A popular > answer to this question has been that Harry should never > have looked into the Pensieve. > Astrofiammante, who was moved to make a Halloween visit to JKR.com < in the hope of finding goodies... Syroun adds her two pence: I think that the biggest regret that Harry has is not having used the mirror that Sirius gave him as a form of contacting him secretly. That single act would have allowed Harry to avert the whole confrontation at the MoM and Sirius would, likely, still be alive. But, that leads me to another theory; the mirror will yet be used for contact between Harry and Sirius in books 6 and 7. Any thoughts? Syroun From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Mon Nov 1 03:25:18 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Mon, 01 Nov 2004 03:25:18 -0000 Subject: Draco chapter (was: What we find there) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 116911 > SSSusan: > Well, *if* I'm right that the detour is to get Daddy out of Azkaban, > then I'd say, yes, Draco will be making his final decision for Team > Voldy. Alla: Hee! Team Voldy. :) Love that. SSSsusan: > Some are thinking it could mean a redeemed Draco, but I just can't > imagine it. snips Susan reasoning why Draco won't be redeemed. (Then again, I'm not one to > hold out a lot of hope for a redeemed Draco at any point in the > septology.) Alla: Unless JKR drastically changed the story, I cannot see redeemed Draco either. I agree with your reasoning, but my main cause for disbelief as Is aid many times will be that we did not see ANY hints of Draco redemption. It wil be rashed, unbelievable and out of nowhere, IMO. From yswahl at stis.net Mon Nov 1 03:26:35 2004 From: yswahl at stis.net (samnanya) Date: Mon, 01 Nov 2004 03:26:35 -0000 Subject: A Spinners [of Tales] End ........Spinners End by Mary Minton Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 116912 Neri Googling "Spinners End" I found that it is the name of a romantic book by Mary Minton: http://www.alibris.com/ search/search.cfm?qwork=6267239&matches=3&qsort=r According to the book review this is a place in London, but it doesn't appear like it really exists. Samnanya Check the symmary and you will find that the story (heavily snipped) is about Francine Chayter who visits her father in London. She wants to know her father better but he hates the sight of her. "an unexpected trip to Monte Carlo brought her a suprise revelation about her mother" Well............. which character in the potterverse is in a somewhat similar situation? who can "the spinner" be a reference to? why would Luna's father "hate" her? and what is the suprise revelation about her mother? s p o i l e r . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . which character in the potterverse is in a somewhat similar situation? Luna of course ....... who can "the spinner" be a reference to? Mr Lovegood, editor and publisher of The Quibbler -- spinner can also mean "spinner of tales" like her father always did in articles printed in the Quibbler (someone creative has to be making up those stories) why would Luna's father "hate" her? and what is the suprise revelation about her mother? Luna's dad can hate her because she was the indirect cause of the death of his wife in that experiment that went awfully wrong. What experiment? Some have said that Luna was bitten by a werewolf as a child and her mom tried to develop a charm, spell or potion to cure her. The spell was not successful and her mom died trying to save her daughter (sounds like a Lilly-like sacrifice to me) We know the werewolf potion was a recent development and that her mom died a year or so after harry entered hogwarts. We know that Luna loves her dad, but can we assume the opposite? I wonder...... So as I have said before, Mr. Lovegood WILL meet his end before the HBP is too far along. the dark lord is seriously bothered with him since he published the Harry interview Luna is still at Hogwarts looking for her stuff after the end of term if they are going on vacation to sweden over the summer then it would make sense for Mr Lovegood to publish a final summer edition before leaving giving Goyle Sr., who was not at the MoM prime opportunity to trash the quibbler and kill Mr. Lovegood If you read this far without falling off your chair, maybe you might actually think it is possible, or even extend the RIP!MrLovegood theory. From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Mon Nov 1 03:29:28 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Mon, 01 Nov 2004 03:29:28 -0000 Subject: Mirror as communication means . Was:Re: What should Harry REALLY feel sorry for? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 116913 > Syroun adds her two pence: snip. But, that leads me to another theory; the mirror will yet be > used for contact between Harry and Sirius in books 6 and 7. lla: As still supporter of SAD DENIAL :o) I am crossing my fingers that you are right. JKR said that mirror will show up :), so why not for that purpose. :) From ReturnOfTheMutt at aol.com Mon Nov 1 03:58:05 2004 From: ReturnOfTheMutt at aol.com (ReturnOfTheMutt at aol.com) Date: Sun, 31 Oct 2004 22:58:05 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] Rowling takes stand on U.S. elections? Message-ID: <1b9.55e3b8f.2eb70e4d@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 116915 In a message dated 10/29/2004 12:21:36 PM Eastern Standard Time, squeakinby at tds.net writes: > >One thing that really rankles is when non-citizens presume to tell > citizens > >(of any country) whom they should vote for. Its presumptious. If she > wants to > >encourage people to excersize their freedom of choice and vote that's one > >thing. But endorsing candidates, whether it be for President of the USA or > for > >Head Dog Catcher, is inappropriate. > > > > > Thank you, Melissa. This whole notion incenses me that non-citizens > feel they should be able to influence our elections as if *they* know > better than we. OMG, they have this show in Japan where immigrants talk about problems with the country and what makes the country rock/suck. I think it's an awesome concept. If we had the same show in America, people would respond to the immigrants issues by telling them to go back to where they came from. We need outside opinions because when you're raised a certain way you don't question things. When I rant about Candidate X, Mom says I should respect him because of his position, because when she was young that was the patriotic thing to do. I like to hear outsider's opinions. Sometimes, like with Hermione and the house elves, they just *don't* understand the issue, but nobody brought up in the wizarding world would even think to question something like that. A fresh perspective is good. Harry and Hermione, and everybody else raised by muggles are like foreigners in the wizarding world. They just don't *get* some things, but they also look at everything though a different set of eyes. I MADE IT ON TOPIC!!!!! [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From nadinesaintamour at hotmail.com Mon Nov 1 04:38:24 2004 From: nadinesaintamour at hotmail.com (catimini15) Date: Mon, 01 Nov 2004 04:38:24 -0000 Subject: What we find there (was: How to Get Through the Door)--SPOILERS!!! In-Reply-To: <003701c4bf78$165bc430$8000a8c0@casa> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 116916 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "fridwulfa hagrid" wrote: > Actually, the standard entry form for any word in latin is nominative and > genitive form, both singular. "Felix Felicis" means, happy, fertile, > prolific, productive, propitious, benevolent, kind. Those are all the > entries I found in my latin diccionary. Mind you, it's a latin- spanish > diccionary, so I had to translate into English, but I think those are the > right meanings. > I think it could well be the next DADA teacher, even though it's chapter 14, > it doesn't necessarily mean that we are meeting him so late, maybe we are > just learning more about him then. > It could be this mysterious man, with the feline looks, yellow eyes, bushy > hair and the limp we were told about some time ago. > Cheers I like the idea that Felix Felicis could be the name of the upcoming new character (next DADA teacher or not) with the feline looks. I may have skipped a few posts today - this thread was very popular - but did anyone mentionned that the latin name for the common domestic cat is Felix Catus (hence Felix the Cat) ? Felix Felicis would definitely suits a feline looking character. Nadine From imamommy at sbcglobal.net Mon Nov 1 05:25:22 2004 From: imamommy at sbcglobal.net (imamommy at sbcglobal.net) Date: Mon, 01 Nov 2004 05:25:22 -0000 Subject: What we find there (was: How to Get Through the Door)--SPOILERS!!! In-Reply-To: <003701c4bf78$165bc430$8000a8c0@casa> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 116917 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "fridwulfa hagrid" wrote: > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "lupinlore" > To: > Sent: Sunday, October 31, 2004 6:53 PM > Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: What we find there (was: How to Get Through the > Door)--SPOILERS!!! > >> > > >> > S > >> > P > >> > O > >> > I > >> > L > >> > E > >> > R > >> > S > >> > P > >> > A > >> > C > >> > E > >> > DON'T READ FURTHER IF YOU WANT TO FIND THIS OUT FOR YOURSELF > >> > > >> > > >> > I MEAN IT!! > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Me (Fridwulfa): > I think it could well be the next DADA teacher, even though it's chapter 14, > it doesn't necessarily mean that we are meeting him so late, maybe we are > just learning more about him then. > It could be this mysterious man, with the feline looks, yellow eyes, bushy > hair and the limp we were told about some time ago. > Cheers > Fridwulfa imamommy: Chapter 14 may not be all that late. In Oop, they don't even get on the Hogwart's Express until Chapter 10. It's possible that "Draco's Detour" takes place before school starts. Cheers! imamommy From catlady at wicca.net Mon Nov 1 05:41:34 2004 From: catlady at wicca.net (Catlady (Rita Prince Winston)) Date: Mon, 01 Nov 2004 05:41:34 -0000 Subject: replies to almost 2000 posts Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 116918 I'm up to Message 116713 of 116916 but my brain feels like it may have stopped working. Occlumency: my theory is that Occlumency serves to block Legilimency, and the connection between the minds of Harry and of LV is not Legilimency (Snape said so, as Legilimency requires eye contact and falls off with distance), so even if Harry had learned Occlumency, it wouldn't have made any different to the mind-link. Sophierom wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/114856 : << So, Dumbledore shoots down (if you believe him) any abstractly noble reasons for Snape's protection of Harry. It's a truly Slytherin motive, I suppose: save Harry, pay off life debt, hate in peace. >> << I think a lot of it, actually, has to do with what he finds out from Quirrell and Dumbledore: that Snape hated/hates Harry's father. Harry is, after all, a boy, a boy who never got to know his father, who idolizes what little knowledge he has of his father (mirror, etc.). So, i can see how this piece of information, told in the way it was, would be enough to keep Harry from changing his opinion about Snape. >> Was Dumbledore deliberately trying to ensure hostility between Harry and Snape? Because Dumbledore could have perfectly well answered Harry's question without saying one word about James, and even without saying anything about Harry being the prophecy boy, and even without saying Snape is a white hat -- he could have said "Professor Snape was trying to to be awarded the Order of Merlin by capturing Voldemort and saving the Philosopher's Stone himself, and it would have made a very bad impression if any students had been harmed." Del wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGr ownups/message/114874 : << sometimes ... he truly becomes incompassionate, in that he refuses to care about the feelings of the people close to him. Ron and Hermione, in particular. He was quite odious to them in OoP. >> And at that time he was being influenced by feelings that originated in Voldemort. Alla wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforG rownups/message/114889 : << As for heroism, we just have to agree to disagree, because I cannot envision the hero who is not compassionate in my mind. >> The hero who rescues victims out of a sense of duty to God or country or whatever, rather than for the victims' own sakes? Dungrollin wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/114961 : << I ... can't help but wonder how many other degrogatory nicknames can be made from 'Severus'... >> I was thinking 'Syphilis' even before listie Phyllis confessed to having been abused with that nickname in her childhood. 'Sewer-gas'? Maybe that would be too easy to throw back at Sirius. 'Sulphurous'? 'Sev-venereal'? 'Squibberus'? 'Septicus'? macfotuk wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/115025 : << Kreacher clearly owes his allegiance much more to Sirius' mother than his father and her portrait in an earlier chapter screams of half breeds and, above all, 'how dare you befoul the house of my fathers -'. (SURELY, it isn't HER father's house (meaning either her actual father or her forefathers) since she (presumably) gained the name Black by marriage? >> Macfotuk offered several possibilities, of which the one closest to my belief is <<-It was such a close intermarriage that both were called Hubby and Wife-to-be were Blacks already and she insisted on living in 'her' home. >> I believe that Sirius's parents were first cousins; their fathers were brothers, so it was the house of Mrs. Black's paternal grandfather as well as Mr. Black's paternal grandfather (same person) -- I get confused counting the generations, but I think Sirius's parents's grandfather would be Phineas Nigellus's grandson .... Further, I like to think that brothers brought their brides home to the Black House and raised their children there ... there enough bedrooms for the Order members who were staying there, therefore enough for three generations of the family to all live together. OTOH, Kreachur may have simply formed the habit of devotion to Mrs Black during however many years she was alive and giving him orders after Mr Black had died. DuffyPoo wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/115572 : << You've just convinced me that not even Sirius knew the whereabouts of the Potters after the FC was produced making Peter the SK. I've always thought it would be silly to let a lot of people in on it as LV could certainly use his magic to torture them into telling. The problem with it, still, is that Sirius knew where to go to look for them when he couldn't find Peter that night. However, I still maintain that the address is blocked from the memories of those who knew when the FC is produced, so when it is broken - in this case by the destruction of the house - that it comes back to those memories and that is how DD knew to send Hagrid and how Sirius knew where to go. >> That was a popular theory before OoP, but OoP provides much more explanation of the Fidelius Charm. With Dumbledore as Secret Keeper of 12 Grimmauld Place, Harry could stand right there and not even see a gap between 11 and 13 until Dumbledore('s handwriting) told him the secret. Dumbledore told each of the Order members the secret, but that didn't break the secret for people who had not been told. Black relatives like Bellatrix and Narcissa surely knew that the Black family home was at 12 Grimmauld Place, and may even have suspected that Sirius was hiding there, but they could have stood in the street all and not been able to see or touch the house despite seeing Order members appear on the sidewalk (by Apparation) and disappear (into the house). Thus we know that if Peter, as Secret Keeper, had told Sirius and Dumbledore and Hagrid and nosy, stupid Bertha Jorkins and two hundred other people where the Potters were hiding, then even if all those people ran to tell Voldemort that his targets were hiding in Godric's Hollow, still Voldemort would have not have been able to find them because it was not *the Secret Keeper* who had told him. (Either he could have gone to their address and found not even a gap between the neighboring houses, as in OoP, or he could have seen the house but been unable to see whether the occupants were in or out, as per Flitwick's statement in PS/SS: "As long as the Secret-Keeper refused to speak, You-Know-Who could search the village where Lily and James were staying for years and never find them, not even if he had his nose pressed against their sitting room window!".) (Steve/bboymin suggested an explanation of that discrepancy in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/116017 ) So to me it makes the most sense that Peter told Sirius and Dumbledore and Hagrid, and James's parents if they were still alive, so that James and Lily didn't have to go completely without visitors despite being in hiding. The objection is usually raised that Dumbledore would have known that Peter was the Secret Keeper if Peter had told him the secret. I think that is why we were shown the written secret in OoP: to let us know that Peter told the secret in writing, and I suppose he imitated Sirius's handwriting for that purpose. Finwitch wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/115203: << [Voldemort]'s somewherein Albania (for some reason he was thrown there). He lived as a spirit and was less than a ghost...>> Just Carol replied in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/115612 : << Doesn't he get there by possessing small animals? That's what he does after he leaves Quirrell, at least. >> I believe one of the spells or a combination of the spells that Voldemort used to try to become immortal worked and that he why he didn't die when he was disembodied by the rebounded curse. I believe that he happened to be in a forest in Albania when he performed the spell that actually worked, and that one side-effect is that his vapour/spirit is always strongly atttacted to that place, as if magnetically. He can only resist it when anchored in a body. Thus whenever his body is removed from him, back he zooms to that spot in the Albanian forest. << As a spirit, all he could do was possess animals (and apparently understand their thoughts and therefore communicate with other animals). But he could also use them to kill and eat other animals, which is why he was regarded as a spirit of terror by the rats and other creatures that Wormtail talked to after LV's second vaporization. >> I have always been under the impression that the little animals were terrified of that Entity because being possessed by It was immediately painful and quickly fatal. They saw their relatives cry out in pain, act weird, and die. That's enough reason to fear. (See Dungrollin's post on possession 116301.) << He was also able, somehow, to communicate with Quirrell and persuade him to carry him, in some form, back to England. (He only possessed him as a punishment, and a means of control, after Quirrell failed to get the stone.) >> If only Quirrell had been a Parselmouth, Voldemort could have communicated with him while possessing a snake (and being seduced by a talking snake is so Biblical). Otherwise, there are some kinds of birds who are good at imitating sounds including human speech, like mynah birds -- mynah birds aren't wild in European forests, but maybe a starling or a magpie? But a lecture on Nietzsche from a little bird wouldn't be so persuasive ... Could Vapormort have been a light breeze in his ear? << whatever form he had when he met Quirrell. (Could he have been a monstrous infant then, as he is in GoF, transformed through Nagini's milk and an incantation without the use of a wand? Or could that transformation have taken place only once, with Wormtail using Voldemort's own wand to transform him?) >> It may be that more than magic and Nagini's venom (to "milk" a snake is to extract its venom such as for making antivenin) was used to make V's ugly-baby body. Some insightful listie suggested that poor Bertha may have provided more than information to LV. I imagine LV having a female captive, a male servant, magic to speed up the process (there wasn't any nine months between Bertha's disappearance and the murder of Frank Bryce), and magic for Vapormort to possess the fetus or embryo in such a way that it became his own body rather than a possessed body ... Magda wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/115788 : << My assumptions about Peter are: - he's able to project back at you whatever image of himself is necessary for you to drop your guard and let him get close to you; - he's lazy and more than pleased to let you do all the scut work that's necessary to change into animagi or finish a Charms essay or whatever, and he's willing to abase himself to get you to do it ("Oh I'll NEVER get this essay finished! I haven't got your brains, James!"); - he doesn't lose his head in a crisis (snip) - (snip). He's in it for the power. >> Replace the laziness & abasement by vanity & arrogance, and that describes Tom Riddle. Kneasy wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/115855 : << A werewolf in a wizard society. Bitter? Feels that life is unfair? Particularly as Sirius sees their jaunts at the full moon as an occasion for fun, for entertainment - and it can't come soon enough for him. Lupin thinks differently; it's painful, it's a loss of humanity, of intellect; it's to be feared. >> PoA: "they did something for me that would make my transformations not only bearable, but the best times of my life. They became Animagi." I don't think young Remus was really annoyed that Sirius wished it was Full Moon. Cat_kind wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/115911 : << The remaining Heads of House would seem to be the obvious candidates, i.e. Snape, Flitwick and Sprout. Snape seems to be a generally nasty piece of work, and I wouldn't put very high odds on him surviving the series either, so we are left with Flitwick and Sprout. We haven't heard much about either of them, but we have to assume some leadership qualities and they seem to be good and unbiased teachers. It would be nice to think the WW will be sufficiently revolutionised that Lupin is a candidate. He seems to be one of the cooler heads in the books, and is depicted as an inspired/inspiring teacher, even above McGonagall. I could see him slipping into the wise leader role, if he's got over the blind loyalty to his friends. The poor sod hardly has friends left to be blindly loyal to. >> This is a forbidden "I agree" post. Btw I wish JKR hadn't put the kibosh on notions of Harry becoming a Hogwarts professor if he survives ... I *do* think he'd be a fine DADA teacher, Head of Gryffindor House, and eventually Headmaster after retiring from being an Auror. Just Carol wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/116004 : << Also, I can understand Black, who had escaped Azkaban with the intention of murdering Pettigrew, being more than ready, even able, to cast an AK to do it. But Lupin? Knowing that using an AK means life in Azkaban or having your soul sucked by the Dementors? Does Lupin have a death wish? And could he even conjure up the cold indifference to the life of a former friend necessary to cast an AK? >> I don't think they were going to cast AK. There are other curses that can kill -- when Sirius *supposedly* killed Pettigrew and 12 Muggles, he supposedly used some curse that killed 13 people and exploded the street, which doesn't sound like AK to me. Your point about Lupin in effect volunteering for a life sentence in Azkaban still holds. Especially as I think Remus must have a very strong survival instinct or love of life -- he didn't have much else to live for in those twelve years between Godric's Hollow and being given the DADA teacher job at Hogwarts -- twelve years with no job, no friends, a lot of poverty, and some horrible memories (of one of his best friends murdering the rest of his best friends). *waves to Kethryn's post 116122* I think it was a demonstration of how much he's willing to sacrifice for loyalty to his friend, in line with all that talk about Marauders dying to protect each other. Anyway, why did they roll up their sleeves before casting that curse? Until now, I thought that was just silly, but now I realised they may have been planning to use something that would splash blood on them ... maybe a Severing Spell on a big artery? But wouldn't that get blood on more than their sleeves? Just Carol wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/116194 : << Snape addressing Lupin by his last name to distance him (contrast Lupin's use of "Severus" to suggest friendship or equality). >> It never occured to me that Remus suggesting that Neville dress the Snape boggart in Gran's clothes was a Remus jab at Snape, or anything but Remus doing his teaching job. But it always seemed to me that Remus addressed Snape as 'Severus' as a way of intentionally irritating Snape for which he could not be blamed as surely Dumbledore always urged all his staff to first-name each other for the sake of collegiality. So much more elegant to knife your enemy by your perfect behavior than by childish name-calling that makes you look bad. Siriusly Snape Susan wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/116202 : << Or perhaps we are back to students as a rule not complaining to teachers, and so [McGonagall], really doesn't know what goes on re: Snape & a couple of select Gryffindors? >> If, as has been speculated, the Castle's paintings, ghosts, and/or House Elfs give the Headmaster an earful about everything the Castle's occupants are up to, and we even have OoP canon that one of the paintings in Dumbledore's office told a *student* (Dean Thomas?) that Harry had killed a basilisk with Godric Gryffindor's sword, then surely the Heads of House also get some information that students never tell them. SSSusan in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/116207 : << Oh, goody! Someone bringing up MM's possible crush on DD! I was hoping someone would pick up on that when I first posted on MM a couple of weeks ago, but no one did then. >> McGonagall showed a bit of hero-worship ("Only because you're too noble to use them") in that 10 to 14 years-ago and out-of-character Book 1, Chapter 1, but not since then. Far from having a crush on DD, she has been happily paired up with Hooch since before she (McG) got the job at Hogwarts (canon evidence = it's so *obvious*, why doesn't everyone *see* it?). I suppose they live together unostentatiously in staff living quarters in the Castle; I imagine McG proposed Hooch for the Flying teacher job when it became available. Snape has much more of a crush on DD. Not explicitly sexual. Snape has a huge father-figure projection on DD, with hero-worship of DD, and a psychological desperate need to be approved, praised, forgiven by DD, and sibling rivalry with Harry ... Lady MacBeth wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/116290 : << There's also the possibility that Narcissa's family and Lucius's family are not that distantly removed. Sirius went off on a tangent at one point about how he was related to the Weasleys - plus, there's at least two surnames besides the Weasleys on his tree. Phinneas Nigellus was a prominent person on his family tree, yet Sirius's surname is Black. That suggests close interconnectedness between the families. >> I personally feel certain that Phineas Nigellus is Phineas Nigellus Black. (One doesn't have to be a Southerner to be known by two given names, like my New Jersey born and raised friend Lee Ann Whatever-her- husband's-surname-is.) Phineas is a Bible name, also spelled Pinhas which the Hebrews got from the Eqyptian name Pa-N'hasi which means "the Nubian", like modern people naming their kid Scot or Dane. (Altho't it turns out that there are so many people who have heard that Phineas is Hebrew for snake-mouth that JKR must have heard that story and probably is referencing it as well.) And Nigellus is Latin for Neil but widely thought to derive from "niger" the Latin word for "black". Thus, our charming Slytherin Headmaster's name is (close enough) Black Black Black. I tried to think up other names in the same pattern and came up only with Ciaran Cole and Melanie Maura. "jiggsvelasco" wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/116327 : << I have a question about the Fountain of the magical brethen in the MoM. Why are merfolks not included in it? >> It is my theory that that Fountain refers to some specific episode in wizarding history, and that part of DD's plan for Harry's destiny is to do it over again, except get it right this time. So far he has gathered Harry and Ron (wizards), Hermione (witch), Dobby (House Elf), and Firenze (centaur) to his team. He still needs Bill Weasley to recruit a goblin for the re-creation. Neri TBAYed in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/116369 : << "Those ships that are NOT sea worthy just sink under their own weight, and I've found that this is the most accurate and simple way to ascertain that they aren't sea worthy". >> This is a forbidden LOL post! Tonks wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/116374 : << Also I think that Occlumency gives a person the ability to block evil thoughts and so called *the devil made me do it* impulses. >> Snape is said to be a superb Occlumens. Do you think he blocks evil thoughts and "the devil made me do it" impulses. Charme wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/116435 : << Ancient Egyptian words like "mut" (mother) and "baal" (bull) are all derivatives of the words we still know in English today, >> I don't know how many Kemeti words for "bull" there were, but IIRC the most common was "ka", possibly able to make a pun on another word "ka" that meant kind of "soul". "Baal' means "lord" in Hebrew and some related Semitic languages. "Mut" seems to have meant "death" and "vulture" as well as "mother". (I once took a summer school class in Hieroglypics, but I am nowhere near smart enough to take Stuart Tyson Smith's class on how to figure out how Egyptian was actually pronounced in different centuries, so I cannot even speculate on how the different words written with the same phonemes and different determinatives were pronounced, differently or the same.) Boyd wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforG rownups/message/116494 : << Having narrowly escaped Azkaban, they turned more to their families (most appear to have had children about Harry's age...hmmmm) and other diversions. >> I have a theory that there was Another Prophecy, one known to Voldemort, but not to Dumbledore. This other prophecy was something like a boy born at such and such a time will bring victory to his father's side. So LV ordered all his Death Eaters to go home and procreate ... actually, there isn't much evidence of DE children in Harry's year except from Lucius Malfoy and his buddies, so maybe it was Lucius rather than Voldie who heard and acted on this prophecy. LisaMarie wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/116705 : << In the chapter when Harry goes to the Leaky Cauldron (shoddy reference, sorry), the inn-keeper, Tom, /clicks his fingers/ to make a fire in Harry's room. Hagrid and Hermione both also conjure fires (in PS/SS), but use wands to do so. What's with all this /finger clicking/?!? >> The Leaky Cauldron is a very important place, gateway to Diagon Alley, so maybe Tom the inn-keeper is a very powerful mage who can do lots of wandless magic. Or maybe Tom is not an especially powerful mage and can't especially do wandless magic, but hired someone to enchant all *his* fireplaces so that they light when he clicks his fingers (I imagine that means the same as 'snap his fingers'). It's not like we'll ever see him lighting a fire anywhere other than the Leaky Cauldron, to see if he uses a wand then. Lucy wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforG rownups/message/116711 : << How long do you think house elves live? just a random question. Kreacher is old but how old? and how much longer is he going to go on living? Dobby has been with the Malfoys for a while. is winky still quite young? >> Kreachur is old enough that he knew Mrs Black in person even tho' she's been dead for ten years. Dobby at the beginning of CoS apparently remembers the bad old days when Voldemort was in power, then eleven years past. From my memory, Sirius said his Aunt Elladora had started the custom of beheading House Elves when they got too old to carry a tea-tray, and mounting their heads on the wall. That was long enough ago that there were enough House Elf head on plaques to go all the way up the stairway. Just how long ago did Aunt Elladora start that custom, and was she really a great-great-aunt? Btw, has anyone mentioned that all those House Elf heads were described as having a family resemblance to each other and to Kreachur in terms of having a prominent snout? From PenapartElf at aol.com Mon Nov 1 06:17:06 2004 From: PenapartElf at aol.com (PenapartElf at aol.com) Date: Mon, 1 Nov 2004 01:17:06 EST Subject: ADMIN: Call for Leaders of Chapter Discussions Message-ID: <149.3764a69b.2eb72ee2@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 116919 Greetings and Salutations! On behalf of HPfGU, I would like to thank Pip (who got this off the ground), Kelley, Ali, Eloise, Pippin, Claire, KathyK (twice!), Oryomai, Abigail, Kirstini, Marianne, Jen Reese, Penny, Aesha, Debbie, Melody (twice!), Elisabeth, Amy Z, Dicentra, Wendy, Amber (twice!), Melanie, Alla (will be twice!), Potioncat, and in advance, Meri, for facilitating one chapter at a time our discussion of OotP so far. Brava! If you have enjoyed the chapter discussions and would like to do your part by volunteering as a chapter discussion leader for any of the following, ch. 30 (Grawp) ASAP ch. 31 (O.W.L.s) Nov. 8, 2004-ish ch. 32 (Out of the Fire) Nov. 22, 2004 ch. 33 (Fight and Flight) Dec. 6, 2004 ch. 34 (The Department of Mysteries) Dec. 20, 2004 ch. 36 (The Only One He Ever Feared) Jan. 17, 2005 ch. 38 (The Second War Begins) Feb. 14, 2005 please contact me *offlist* to specify the chapter(s) that interests you. Thanks! :) Penapart Elf (penapart_elf @yahoo.com, minus that extra space) for the HPfGU Admin Team P.S. The complete schedule for OotP Chapter Discussions can be found at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/database From jlnbtr at yahoo.com Mon Nov 1 01:07:06 2004 From: jlnbtr at yahoo.com (jlnbtr) Date: Mon, 01 Nov 2004 01:07:06 -0000 Subject: What we find there (was: How to Get Through the Door)--SPOILERS!!! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 116920 S P O I L E R S S P O I L E R S How glad am I to get through the door!!! It seems like forever since we got any news from JKR. But it's annoying that instead of answers all we get are MORE questions. Could it mean the book is coming out soon? I certainly hope so. So, chapter 2 SPINNERS END. As I expect it'll never be what we think, so probably not a place and probably not Aragog (or any family member), I just revisited JKR website, and under the rubbish bin, there's this thing, this spinner thing (I completely forgot the name, sorry), just like the one Ron sent Harry from Egypt for his birthday. Harry's kept it locked inside his trunk, so maybe (MAYBE), he finally gets it out and uses for something, like he carries it around (in HQ??)to sees who's trustworthy and someone we never thought of sets this thing like crazy?? That could be interesting a betrayal just at the biginnig of the book. I think chapter 1 covers the events on Godric's Hollow and Harry leaving Privet Drive, so chapter 2 is probably when Harry meets Ron, Hermione and the entire OoP. DRACO'S DETOUR -> Although I like the idea of Draco visiting Lucius in Azkaban and maybe figuring out a way to get him out. I like the idea of Draco changing his morals, turning good. Maybe he realizes LV is worthless and because of him his daddy's in prison, so he decides to do everything different, he could be a spy like Snape. The reason I don't think it's Draco's visit to azkaban is because we've always seen the books from Harry's POV, and WHY would Harry go to Azkaban with Draco? It doesn't make any sense to me (IMO) As for the 14th chapter, I haven't the slightest idea what it may mean. Maybe Crookshanks' girlfriend? I don't know. Cheers everyone JULI From jlnbtr at yahoo.com Mon Nov 1 03:49:04 2004 From: jlnbtr at yahoo.com (jlnbtr) Date: Mon, 01 Nov 2004 03:49:04 -0000 Subject: Mirror as communication means . Was:Re: What should Harry REALLY feel sorry for? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 116921 > Syroun adds her two pence: > snip. > But, that leads me to another theory; the mirror will yet be > used for contact between Harry and Sirius in books 6 and 7. > Alla: > As still supporter of SAD DENIAL :o) I am crossing my fingers that > you are right. JKR said that mirror will show up :), so why not for > that purpose. :) As MUCH as I would like the mirror as a mean of communication between Harry and Sirius I don't see it happening, already at the end of OoP Harry's tried using it to communicate with Sirius and it didn't work. Besides he probably didn't have the mirror with him when he crossed the veil. Who knows maybe it's left on Grimmauld Place and it could be used for Harry to know what's going on in the VWII, this way he won't do anything (like going to the MoM) without talking first with the order or at least with DD, how much trouble would this save him. Juli From jlnbtr at yahoo.com Mon Nov 1 03:53:22 2004 From: jlnbtr at yahoo.com (jlnbtr) Date: Mon, 01 Nov 2004 03:53:22 -0000 Subject: What should Harry REALLY feel sorry for? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 116922 > Alla: > > So, my question is - for what in his life Harry should REALLY > > feel sorry for? > > (snip) > > Syroun adds her two pence: > I think that the biggest regret that Harry has is not having used > the mirror that Sirius gave him as a form of contacting him > secretly. That single act would have allowed Harry to avert the > whole confrontation at the MoM and Sirius would, likely, still be > alive. That and not going to Snape BEFORE going into Umbridge's office. No matter how much he hates Snape he's still a member of the order. So why didn't anyone (Harry, Ron, Hermione, Ginny) think of him? An other thing that bugs me is, if he talked to Kreacher via floo powder, why didn't he just travel to GP and talk to someone, anyone? Juli From gbannister10 at aol.com Mon Nov 1 07:42:48 2004 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Mon, 01 Nov 2004 07:42:48 -0000 Subject: What we find there- Places - real and imagined In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 116923 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Steve" wrote: > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "nkafkafi" wrote: Neri: > > > > Spinners End certainly sounds like a place. IMO it is the Order's > > new HQ, or at least their safe place for Harry. ..edited.. > > > > According to the book review this is a place in London, but it > > doesn't appear like it really exists. There is also an industrial > > estate in Birmingham: > > http://www.touchbirmingham.co.uk/comdir/cditem.cfm/20256 > > > > Neri > > bboyminn: > > Oddly enough Spinners End Industrial Park is just west of Birmingham > near a suburd called */Dursley/*. Based on my search at > www.uk.map24.com for the postal code associated with the industrial park. > > SPINNERS END INDUSTRIAL ESTATE, OLDFIELDS. CRADLEY HEATH, WEST > MIDLANDS, B64 6BS, UK Geoff: There is no road called Spinners End listed in my "A to Z of Greater London". Having lived in London for 45 years, I can recall no area with such a name - unless it's tucked away well on the periphery in one of the New Towns perhaps. The Birmingham link is very interesting though. I'd forgotten that Dursley was a place. Mark you, there is a Mount Vernon hospital in Greater London. :-) From eggplant9998 at yahoo.com Mon Nov 1 07:20:41 2004 From: eggplant9998 at yahoo.com (eggplant9998) Date: Mon, 01 Nov 2004 07:20:41 -0000 Subject: What should Harry REALLY feel sorry for? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 116924 Alla wrote: > I can only think about three things > [Harry should feel sorry about]Harry > not seeing Hermione side of things > earlier in PoA That is one of the few times in any of the books where Hermione was dead wrong; her cat was trying to kill Ron's beloved pet and she didn't seem to give a damn. > Harry looking into Snape's Pensieve Good for Harry! Snape was not fighting fair. Snape was an adult and a skilled professor of magic and yet he took the precaution of removing his most embarrassing memories before they started to probe each others minds. Snape did not give Harry, who was just a school boy, the same opportunity and that seems cowardly to me. It's like the heavyweight boxing champion of the world putting on protective padding before fighting a little boy while the kid gets nothing. And Harry is supposed to apologize after Snape delighted in humiliating Harry by bringing up the memory of a dog chasing him up a tree? Not a chance. The one thing Harry REALLY should regret is stopping Lupin and Sirius from killing Wormtail in book 3, the biggest mistake of his life. > and of course Harry trying to cast Crucio That may have been the wrong thing to do, I'm not sure, but I am sure I'm delighted Harry did it. I don't want Harry to be TOO good, it's saccharine, I want him to have an edge. Eggplant From jlnbtr at yahoo.com Mon Nov 1 06:22:36 2004 From: jlnbtr at yahoo.com (jlnbtr) Date: Mon, 01 Nov 2004 06:22:36 -0000 Subject: Harry's anger, influenced by LV? (Re: replies to almost 2000 posts) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 116925 Catlady (Rita Prince Winston) wrote: > I'm up to Message 116713 of 116916 but my brain feels like it may > have stopped working. > > Del wrote in > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/114874 : > > << sometimes ... he truly becomes incompassionate, in that he > refuses to care about the feelings of the people close to him. Ron > and Hermione, in particular. He was quite odious to them in OoP. >> > > And at that time he was being influenced by feelings that originated > in Voldemort. I don't think every time he was mad or angry at them it was because LV was mad/angry. Harry behaved like this cause he had a lot on his mind, he feels resposible for LV's return (for not letting S&L kill Peter), he wants to help in the OoP but he can't because he's too young, he was left for 4 weeks at a muggle house with no one to talk to.... I can understand his mood, he's mad at everything and everyone, AND he's a teenager. I remember when I was 15, somedays I loved everyone and the next I hated them. There's all this hormones in his body with nothing to do. And as the year went by, DU took from him all he loved: Sirius' letters, Quidditch. Hogsmeade... Oh yeah, and most of the WW thinks he's crazy. He has every right to act like that. I only reply to one of your many posts cause all of them have been discussed over and over. By the way, nice post, really summarizes last week. JULI From gbannister10 at aol.com Mon Nov 1 07:52:45 2004 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Mon, 01 Nov 2004 07:52:45 -0000 Subject: JKR.com's SPOILERS In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 116926 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Krista7" wrote: Krista: > Felix Felicis in Latin is something like "Luck of the Lucky." If I remember > correctly, "felix" is both the masculine and neuter singular of this adjective, so > it could be either "the lucky (man)" or just "luck." In addition, given JKR's love > of word play, I'm inclined to believe it's both "luck of the lucky" AND the other > side of the Latin meaning, which is to be of good omen, to be of good fortune. Geoff: My Oxford Latin dictionary suggests that "felix" is a third declension adjective, in which case the genetive form is the same when used with masculine, feminine and neuter nouns. I don't think it would be used on its own for the "lucky man" because of this. It does of course occur as a given name. - there is Felix whom St.Paul met in the Acts of the Apostles for instance. Geoff Pay a virtual visit to Exmoor and the preserved West Somerset Railway at: http://www.aspectsofexmoor.com From finwitch at yahoo.com Mon Nov 1 08:18:07 2004 From: finwitch at yahoo.com (finwitch) Date: Mon, 01 Nov 2004 08:18:07 -0000 Subject: What we find there (was: How to Get Through the Door)--SPOILERS!!! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 116927 > Antosha: > > > Also, it could be glossed as spinners (plural noun) end (verb). In which case politicians or > spiders seem the most likely candidates. Finwitch: You know, that's hat I thought, but.. that'd make it a bit inclompete. What do spinners end? Their lives? Or was it to mean Spinners' End - or Spinner's End--? But you know, maybe Spinners End is poison that gets rid of spiders? (Guess Ron would like it). Place-name would fit nicely for me, though. Particularly as Harry's to leave the Dursleys early on... to go where? Finwitch From chrissilein at yahoo.com Mon Nov 1 08:23:42 2004 From: chrissilein at yahoo.com (LadyOfThePensieve) Date: Mon, 01 Nov 2004 08:23:42 -0000 Subject: A Spinners [of Tales] End ........Spinners End by Mary Minton In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 116929 Hi, I simply think this is a very interesting and crucial information. we laready know JKR based Mrs Norris on the Mrs Norris in Austen?s Emma. So why shouldn?t she be inspired by a book she probably read: Spinners End? --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "samnanya" wrote: > > Neri > Googling "Spinners End" I found that it is the name of > a romantic book by Mary Minton: http://www.alibris.com/ > search/search.cfm?qwork=6267239&matches=3&qsort=r > According to the book review this is a place in London, > but it doesn't appear like it really exists. > > Samnanya > Check the symmary and you will find that the story > (heavily snipped) is about Francine Chayter who visits > her father in London. She wants to know her father better > but he hates the sight of her. "an unexpected trip to > Monte Carlo brought her a suprise revelation about her > mother" > > Well............. which character in the potterverse is in > a somewhat similar situation? > who can "the spinner" be a reference to? > why would Luna's father "hate" her? > and what is the suprise revelation about her mother? > > > s > p > o > i > l > e > r > > > . > . > . > . > . > . > . > . > . > . > . > . > . > . > . > . > which character in the potterverse is in a somewhat > similar situation? Luna of course ....... > > who can "the spinner" be a reference to? Mr Lovegood, > editor and publisher of The Quibbler -- spinner can also > mean "spinner of tales" like her father always did in > articles printed in the Quibbler (someone creative has > to be making up those stories) > > why would Luna's father "hate" her? and > what is the suprise revelation about her mother? > Luna's dad can hate her because she was the indirect > cause of the death of his wife in that experiment that > went awfully wrong. What experiment? Some have said that > Luna was bitten by a werewolf as a child and her mom > tried to develop a charm, spell or potion to cure her. > The spell was not successful and her mom died trying to > save her daughter (sounds like a Lilly-like sacrifice to me) > We know the werewolf potion was a recent development > and that her mom died a year or so after harry entered > hogwarts. We know that Luna loves her dad, but can we > assume the opposite? > I wonder...... > > > So as I have said before, > > Mr. Lovegood WILL meet his end before the HBP is > too far along. > > the dark lord is seriously bothered with him since > he published the Harry interview > > Luna is still at Hogwarts looking for her stuff > after the end of term > > if they are going on vacation to sweden over the > summer then it would make sense for Mr Lovegood to > publish a final summer edition before leaving > giving Goyle Sr., who was not at the MoM prime opportunity > to trash the quibbler and kill Mr. Lovegood > > If you read this far without falling off your chair, > maybe you might actually think it is possible, or even > extend the RIP!MrLovegood theory. From finwitch at yahoo.com Mon Nov 1 09:14:19 2004 From: finwitch at yahoo.com (finwitch) Date: Mon, 01 Nov 2004 09:14:19 -0000 Subject: Harry, Hermione, Sirius, and the Dream In-Reply-To: <20041031142025.42160.qmail@web53104.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 116930 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Magda Grantwich wrote: > > Finwitch: > > > > Normal working day? Sure, but Harry *had* seen the corridor in DoM > > before, during the day he had trial (otherwise it'd just be some > > corridor he'd not recognise). He HAD seen DoM before, during a > > working day, and NO ONE was there then as far as he could see. > > > Well, actually HE was there himself, and Arthur Weasley who'd taken > him there, and everyone in the wizen-whatchamacallit was there too. > So during a working day there would likely be people around that > area. Not in the Department of Mysteries corridor - they just happened to be in the same *floor*. (Wonder if the workers wear invisibility cloaks for uniform?) > > And the SNAKE got there just fine to kill Arthur, which WAS a true > > vision. So apparently, Voldemort knows how to get in (and besides, > > Harry saw Lucius Malfoy, a DE, giving bribes when he was at the > > Ministry). > > That happened in the middle of the night. The Sirius-vision happened > in the afternoon. So did the TRUE vision Harry had in GoF, during Divination Class. And um... maybe it was Saturday? And just because the place was seemingly empty (except for Voldemort & Sirius) does not invalidate the vision. Not in WW, where you'd have Polyjuice Potion, invisibility cloaks etc. > > > And um - what if Voldemort HAD captured Sirius and was torturing > > him in order to get Harry there - possibly polyjuiced as an auror > > or something..? > > But he hadn't, had he? You know, we don't know HOW Voldemort tricked Harry. What if he had one of his DEs or some captured Ministry official (Fudge, perhaps - or someone else?) drink Polyjuice with Sirius hair (provided by Kreacher) and go on with the torture until he knew Harry saw it... As it is, Harry had NO WAY to know his Vision was incorrect. And anyway, Voldemort was there in the end, was he not? And as for the mirror, Sirius was tending Buckbeak when Harry called. Kreacher may have answered the mirror as well as fire-place. Finwitch From finwitch at yahoo.com Mon Nov 1 09:26:35 2004 From: finwitch at yahoo.com (finwitch) Date: Mon, 01 Nov 2004 09:26:35 -0000 Subject: Harry's anger, influenced by LV? (Re: replies to almost 2000 posts) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 116931 JULI: > I don't think every time he was mad or angry at them it was because > LV was mad/angry. Harry behaved like this cause he had a lot on his > mind, he feels resposible for LV's return (for not letting S&L kill > Peter), he wants to help in the OoP but he can't because he's too > young, he was left for 4 weeks at a muggle house with no one to talk > to.... I can understand his mood, he's mad at everything and > everyone, AND he's a teenager. I remember when I was 15, somedays I > loved everyone and the next I hated them. There's all this hormones > in his body with nothing to do. And as the year went by, DU took from > him all he loved: Sirius' letters, Quidditch. Hogsmeade... Oh yeah, > and most of the WW thinks he's crazy. He has every right to act like > that. Finwitch: I agree, but for some reason my imagination has come up with - well, that silvery thing Sirius knocked off Harry with the book - could it have injected something into Harry? Like adrenaline (which WOULD make Harry angry, not knowing it's because of that, particularly added to all the testosterone flooting in...). It just *bothers* me, what that thing was! Maybe some sort of poison that's symptomless until much later? A disease? Or... Finwitch From cparnell at bigpond.net.au Mon Nov 1 10:18:28 2004 From: cparnell at bigpond.net.au (saieditor) Date: Mon, 01 Nov 2004 10:18:28 -0000 Subject: What we find there --SPOILERS!!! In-Reply-To: <20041031235307.39214.qmail@web20022.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 116932 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Rebecca Stephens wrote: > > S > P > O > I > L > E > R > > S > P > A > C > E > > > > > I've read a little more now. I've found out that > almost everyone thinks Spinners End is a place name. > So now I don't. I just think we're all going to be > wrong. JKR is just too sneaky. :D > > > > Rebecca > I agree. I think its the end of spinning the web of deception (LV has not come back) by Cornelius and cohorts; a new Minister of Magic will be created, and I also suspect the powerbase of Percival Ignatius Weasley will come to an end. As far as I know, there is only one person who can corral Percy, and what if had to say 'YES MINISTER' to his mother? OOTP ended with Draco and Harry, wands out, ready for an almighty fight, which began with Draco blaming Harry for Lucius's imprisonment. JKR has hinted we are going to see something of Narcissa Malfoy, and I would not put it past Draco to make a private visit to Azkaban before boarding the Hogwarts Express, and receiving certain information or instructions from Lucius. Never forget that Draco is a moral coward. He will save his own bacon and nothing else. (BTW, Molly as Minister would make an interesting foil to Mrs Narcissa (Nasty little name, yes? - presaging a nasty character?) Malfoy. Felix is latin in origin as some have pointed out; felicity is a state of benevolence, so happiness, luck, and good tidings would seem to be the order of the day. JKR was once asked, if she were in Harry's shoes, what would she do? The reply was, JKR!Harry would go to a certain room which has properties he has not yet discovered. I suspect these hitherto unknown properties are to do with communication. I suspect this Felix Felicius is to do with the Room of Requirement. The one thing I think which would give Harry some felicity with regard the death of Sirius is some communication with Sirius, (this does not mean Sirius coming back) and we have not yet been introduced to one thing JKR mentioned once: "Wizards/Witches have a much better (means or medium) of communication than the Internet!" Whether this is talking though mirrors or certain paintings (note that everyone can talk to paintings - what if some are couriers or channels of communication?) or some wizarding spell similar to mediumship, I don't know; but don't rule this out. Ditto, don't rule out psychic mediumship; after all, the batty Divination teacher is what the new agers call an "untrained medium". So there are mediums, a room full of prophecies. Saieditor (feeling prophetic tonight!) From mimbeltonia at yahoo.com Mon Nov 1 08:19:05 2004 From: mimbeltonia at yahoo.com (mimbeltonia) Date: Mon, 01 Nov 2004 08:19:05 -0000 Subject: Sirius Mirror / Spinners End In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 116933 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "jlnbtr" wrote: > As MUCH as I would like the mirror as a mean of communication between > Harry and Sirius I don't see it happening, already at the end of OoP > Harry's tried using it to communicate with Sirius and it didn't work. > Besides he probably didn't have the mirror with him when he crossed > the veil. Who knows maybe it's left on Grimmauld Place and it could > be used for Harry to know what's going on in the VWII, this way he > won't do anything (like going to the MoM) without talking first with > the order or at least with DD, how much trouble would this save him. > > Juli Mimbeltonia: As soon as Harry unpacks his trunk (something he may very well not get around to before Chapter 2) he will find the broken pieces of the mirror Sirius gave him. He should be able to fix it with a simple "reparo". Either by means of the repared mirror - or maybe there was a note or something similar (some wizard equivalent) between the mirror and its frame - he might get the incentive to seek out (or simply find out more about) Spinners End? To me it sounds like another street off Diagon Alley, but... Or could some old memory be stored in the mirror, Sirius memories from the day Harry's parents died? I like the idea of Spinners End being where Harry was kept before being brought to the Dursleys. The first chapter of PS/CS could very well come as second or third in HBP... From eggplant9998 at yahoo.com Mon Nov 1 08:23:28 2004 From: eggplant9998 at yahoo.com (eggplant9998) Date: Mon, 01 Nov 2004 08:23:28 -0000 Subject: Ron's bad behaviour. Was: Re: What should Harry REALLY feel sorry for? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 116934 "dumbledore11214" wrote: >I see nothing unusual in Ron's behaviour. >He got gealous (IMO), he got over it. I happen to think that's a very big deal, I think it would permanently poison most friendships, it's just lucky for Ron that Harry has a forgiving nature. Few people are fortunate enough to have a friend as good as Harry and Ron almost threw it away. He had a fight with his best friend and it was more than just a little spat, it lasted about a month. Remember this was a friend who saved his sister's life, a friend who demonstrated a willingness to risk his own life to save Ron too.I understand why he had the fight, he was jealous of Harry, and I understand why he was jealous, he was insecure; however understanding why somebody is obnoxious does not make him one bit less obnoxious. Poor Harry was going through a very difficult time, he was scared to death he was going to get killed in the first task of the Tri- Wizard tournament, or even worse, make a complete fool of himself. He was really at a low point in his life, everybody except Hermione thought he was a liar, he was worried Sirius would get caught, most of the students seemed to hate him, he was depressed, he was terrified, and he needed moral support from Ron. He didn't get it. Harry didn't ask Ron to risk his life, he just asked him to believe him when he said he didn't put his name in the cup, he just asked him to be his friend. Ron refused, Harry's only friend was Hermione. Sure it was difficult for Ron to live under the shadow of his brothers but it's hard for me to get very weepy over Ron's early years. Everybody has problems growing up but it seems to me Ron's childhood was pretty wonderful, as close to being perfect as anybody ever had. Harry's childhood on the other hand was hell, a pure undiluted nightmare, but that never made him let down a friend at the very time he needed help the most. Harry has forgiven him so I guess I should too, but Ron should have the good grace to be thoroughly ashamed of himself. Eggplant From mimbeltonia at yahoo.com Mon Nov 1 09:14:57 2004 From: mimbeltonia at yahoo.com (mimbeltonia) Date: Mon, 01 Nov 2004 09:14:57 -0000 Subject: What should Harry REALLY feel sorry for? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 116935 > > Eggplant: > The one thing Harry REALLY should regret is stopping Lupin and > Sirius from killing Wormtail in book 3, the biggest mistake of his > life. > Or was it? Wasn't Voldemort bound to show up some time anyway? The prophecy has no "provided that" in it. And how about Wormtail being in Harry's debt (as Dumbledore points out at the end of the book). Maybe this will be exactly what saves him in the end... Mimbeltonia- From finwitch at yahoo.com Mon Nov 1 12:27:07 2004 From: finwitch at yahoo.com (finwitch) Date: Mon, 01 Nov 2004 12:27:07 -0000 Subject: What should Harry REALLY feel sorry for? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 116936 > > > > Eggplant: > > > > The one thing Harry REALLY should regret is stopping Lupin and > > Sirius from killing Wormtail in book 3, the biggest mistake of his > > life. Mimbeltonia: > Or was it? Wasn't Voldemort bound to show up some time anyway? The > prophecy has no "provided that" in it. And how about Wormtail being > in Harry's debt (as Dumbledore points out at the end of the book). > Maybe this will be exactly what saves him in the end... And, to add why it WAS good for Harry: After Harry interfered, Sirius let go of his obsession for revenge; instead, as he realised, being free - he offers Harry a home. Result: Harry manages a thought Happy enough to keep the Dementors away long enough for his other self to cast a Patronus. I very much doubt Harry could have cast even the little mist with 'letter from Hogwarts' he did against the boggart if he'd just watched Peter Pettigrew die. Too bad the rat escaped, but much worse if Harry had been KISSED, wouldn't you say? And we don't know why Dumbledore figures that Voldemort wouldn't want a servant in Harry Potter's debt... there IS something yet to be played out, but for me, the way Harry managed to drive out those Dementors was quite enough already. Finwitch From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Mon Nov 1 12:46:36 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Mon, 01 Nov 2004 12:46:36 -0000 Subject: The length of the Pensieve Scene In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 116937 Steve wrote : "The best part about you, Del, is that you never make it easy." Del replies : I didn't know I was supposed to. And I shudder to think what the worst part about me is, then. Stever wrote : "So, it's intellect that drives the selection of that memory, but it is subconscious emotional attachment to the event that drives the size of memory. " Del replies : I like that explanation. It makes sense. Thanks ! Of course, it would indicate that M. Severus "Supposedly in total control of his emotions" Snape is quite deluded about himself ;-) Del From finwitch at yahoo.com Mon Nov 1 13:39:07 2004 From: finwitch at yahoo.com (finwitch) Date: Mon, 01 Nov 2004 13:39:07 -0000 Subject: What we find there (was: How to Get Through the Door)... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 116938 Laura: > Someone's had an interesting idea on the Leaky Cauldron comments > section. JK originally planned for Chapter 1 of HBP to be the first > chapter of PS/SS. So Chapter 1 of HBP must deal with the murder of > the Potters in Godrics Hollow. If Chapter 2: 'Spinners End' continues > this theme, it could answer the question of where Hagrid took Harry > in those missing 24 hours. > > Any thoughts? Well, in "extra stuff" - the opening chapter of Book Six was intended for "Philosopher's stone", "Prisoner of Azkaban" and "Order of the Phoenix", but here, finally, it works. So - what is common to all 3 books? At least, *Harry* does magic in ALL of them in the beginning of the book! Childhood-magic. Accidental/unaware; then, accidental/aware; in OOP, intended/aware. Oh, Truth: Hagrid tells Harry the truth of his parents (as far as he knows) and puts a spell on Dudley. It is because of that Harry remembers a bit more: laughter. In PoA, Harry tells the truth to Marge (who doesn't believe him), learns the truth about Sirius, and again, MORE about his parents and their death (and his memories fo further back, due to Dementors!). OOP, Harry encounters Dementors again (and so does Dudley. What DID Dudley see?), learns much more about James&Lily and a bit about his paternal grandparents, but particularly James, and not so good this time. So are we going to get Harry's *memories* of that night? Interestingly enough, PS is the only one where the first chapter is completely non-Harry POV. (Sure, we get Frank-Bryce-POV in GoF, but Harry's *dreaming* it!) So um - Harry dreams of that night, does some magic with intent but unaware he's doing it? Metamorphmagi perhaps - reaching for something and growing a bigger arm...? Finwitch From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com Mon Nov 1 13:57:12 2004 From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (Barry Arrowsmith) Date: Mon, 1 Nov 2004 13:57:12 +0000 Subject: Zombie!Crouch? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 116939 Browsing through old posts and I came across this one from meckelburg, No. 22615 > In GoF Barty Crouch said he had turned his fathers corpse into a bone before burying it. Why did he do that? When I read that, I thought of Voldemort using the "bone of the father" to get his body back. Could this bone-incident with Barty be a hint from JKR about Barty's soul. Voldemort was not dead, he just lacked a body. Barty isn't dead either, he only lacks his soul. > Most posters haven't thought much about this little episode. It's generally accepted that young Bartimus turned his father into a bone because he'd be easier to dispose of that way. And any bone found buried outside Hagrid's hut would probably be regarded as one Fang had filed away for later consideration. But thinking about it, it does seem a bit more than coincidence that 'bone of my father' should turn up twice in the same book - both of them hated, both murdered by their sons and both of the sons turning out to need a little refurbishment. It's also interesting that although Barty did the dirty deed before Voldy had his make-over in the graveyard, it wasn't revealed to us until afterwards - just at a time when we were concentrating on other things - a very opportune moment for a sneaky JKR to slip a clue past our guard. Can't recall that anyone bothered to retrieve the bone, either. What happened to B.Jnr after his snogging session with a Dementor? Anyone know? Azkaban? St Mungo's? Fudge using him as a doorstop? Mannequin at Madam Malkin's? If B.Jnr were reanimated what would he be? Closest I could come up with was that old favourite the zombie. Next question: I thought these were raised from the dead? B.Jnr isn't dead, he just(!) lacks a soul. Time to hit the web. Seems that our perception of zombiedom has been greatly influenced by Hollywood, because I found an article that gives a different slant. (Can't provide a link, I'm afraid; the address contains a squiggle that doesn't exist on the Mac keyboard - or if it does I can't find it. But your search engine will find it under "Zombies on the web") "Haitian Zombies. These are found in the voodoo (or voudou) tradition in Haiti. Their defining feature seems to be that they lack free will and perhaps a soul. Haitian zombies were once normal people, but underwent zombification by a "bokor" through spell or potion, and are afterwards used as slaves." How interesting! They aren't the 'Living Dead' so beloved of late night movies, not in authentic voodoo anyway. But they are evil and they like to snack on brains. Now who do we know that's had brain trouble recently? Ah, yes. Ickle Ronnikins. But I do like that "lack....perhaps a soul." That's encouraging for those that like a bit of mayhem in the books. Enough shuffle space for Jo to bring young Barty lurching back on stage as a free will deficient slave of an evil master? What fun! Oh, just another snippet - voodoo (as a religion) was based on the worship of a snake - a python, unfortunately, which doesn't match Nagini, but who cares if it turns out that we're going to be presented with Slytherin Old Home Week! Kneasy [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From finwitch at yahoo.com Mon Nov 1 14:04:35 2004 From: finwitch at yahoo.com (finwitch) Date: Mon, 01 Nov 2004 14:04:35 -0000 Subject: What we find there (was: How to Get Through the Door)--SPOILERS!!! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 116940 Nadine: > I like the idea that Felix Felicis could be the name of the upcoming > new character (next DADA teacher or not) with the feline looks. I > may have skipped a few posts today - this thread was very popular - > but did anyone mentionned that the latin name for the common > domestic cat is Felix Catus (hence Felix the Cat) ? Felix Felicis > would definitely suits a feline looking character. Finwitch: How about Felix Felicis as someone who is a cat/lion/kneazle/sphinx/other feline -animagus? That someone could also be HBP, AND DADA-professor. Me, I tend to think also of Felix Leiter, a fictional CIA-agent, who is friend to James Bond 007 - a creation of Ian Fleming. Oh, well - some Auror then, for our Potter-books - or someone from Department of Mysteries (no one knows what they do). Or something else entirely. Oh, and I think that FF could indeed be the first to break the 'jinx'! Uhh.. Why is it that the more little hints we get, the more eager we're to read the book? Finwitch From foxmoth at qnet.com Mon Nov 1 14:31:30 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Mon, 01 Nov 2004 14:31:30 -0000 Subject: A Thought about the Secret Keeper Switch Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 116941 We've been wondering how two such clever people as James and Sirius would manage to come up with such a half-baked idea--if Voldemort came after Sirius, as he expected, how could Sirius be sure he wouldn't give away the switch under torture? Well, there's that old standby, the suicide pill -- but maybe Sirius and James were expecting Voldemort to come after Sirius another way. I think they expected that the spy in the Order would try to trick Sirius into giving him the secret. Sirius would pretend to fall for it, and when Voldemort attacked the wrong place, it would prove who the spy was. Thoughts? Pippin From foxmoth at qnet.com Mon Nov 1 15:24:17 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Mon, 01 Nov 2004 15:24:17 -0000 Subject: What should Harry REALLY feel sorry for? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 116942 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "dumbledore11214" wrote: > So, my question is - for what in his life Harry should REALLY feel sorry for?< > > Please think BIG.:) I think the one thing he should really feel sorry for is blaming Sirius's death on Snape. Granted, he has not done anything about this feeling yet, but he will, and I think it will be the biggest mistake he ever makes. Harry blames Snape for stopping the Occlumency lessons (while simultaneously thinking Snape might have been using them to soften him up for Voldemort), for taunting Sirius into leaving the house, and for pretending not to understand him in front of Umbridge. Most of this is irrational, IMO, and canon says straight out that Harry wants to believe Snape is at fault to ease his own sense of guilt. Pippin From quigonginger at yahoo.com Mon Nov 1 15:32:57 2004 From: quigonginger at yahoo.com (quigonginger) Date: Mon, 01 Nov 2004 15:32:57 -0000 Subject: Ron's bad behaviour. Was: Re: What should Harry REALLY feel sorry for? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 116943 Eggplant (I love that name!) wrote: Harry has forgiven him so I > guess I should too, but Ron should have the good grace to be > thoroughly ashamed of himself. Ginger: I agree with the whole gigantic part I snipped, although I am not nearly as bothered by Ron's behaviour as you are. I see it more as a row between friends, albeit a really big row, and a badly timed one for Harry. I think if Harry hadn't been stubborn, it would have been resolved sooner (thinking of the time when Ron interrupted Harry and Sirius by the fire), but the row itself is not in any way Harry's fault. Ron did try to apologize, but Harry wouldn't have it. (US paperback ch.20, p. 358) After the First Task, Ron and Hermione come to see Harry: But Harry was looking at Ron, who was very white and staring at Harry as though he were a ghost. "Harry," he said seriously, "whoever put your name in that goblet- I-I reckon they're trying to do you in!" It was as though the last few weeks had never happened-as though Harry were meeting Ron for the first time, right after he'd been made champion. "Caught on, have you?" Harry said coldly. "Took you long enough." (snip text) Ron opened his mouth uncertainly. Harry knew Ron was about to apologize and suddenly he found he didn't need to hear it. End quoted section. After that Ron does try, and Harry doesn't let him finish, and they both end up grinning at each other. I quoted that whole thing because it has always wondered me about the "it was as though the last few weeks had never happened" part. Is this Harry's POV? Ron's? I really don't understand that part. Any takers on de-confusing me? Ginger, who survived spending Halloween working a graveyard shift alone in a store that is rumoured to be haunted by a guy named Bruce. From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Mon Nov 1 15:36:17 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Mon, 01 Nov 2004 15:36:17 -0000 Subject: Harry, Hermione, Sirius, and the Dream (was : What should Harry REALLY feel In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 116944 Steve/bboymn wrote : " Yes, I get it. You've done this before. Your point is not about the author or character's intent, but about your reaction /in the moment/ as you read that part." Del replies : I don't understand what you mean. My point was about how, as I was discovering the dream along with Harry, it was obvious to me that it was a fake. This might not have been the author's intent, but in that case go complain to her, not me ! She had me eating in her palm all throughout the other books, I swallowed everything she sent my way. If I didn't swallow Harry's dream, it wasn't my fault. It might not have been the character's intent, but then I dont think we're here only to discuss characters' intents. There are people who say that whatever his intentions, Snape's actions are still reprehensible (and I tend to agree with those posters). Similarly, I feel free to say that no matter what Harry's intent was, I always felt it was a mistake for him not to reason more about that dream. As for my reactions in the moment, I feel they are of much more importance for the discussion we had been having than any later reactions. It's easy to determine, after reflection, that Harry was wrong, such an argument would have no value. But if I say that I *immediately* saw that he was wrong, then I feel it is important to the discussion, because IMO it means that the truth could have been seen *even by Harry*. Steve wrote : "As a reader, I'm somewhat tracking Harry's emotions. JKR as an author has, or has attempted, to set the clues to make us feel as Harry feels." Del replies : I'm usually like that too. OoP was harder for me on that matter, because I couldn't follow Harry in his bouts of shouting and irrational anger, since they are so much against my own habits. But I still managed to follow him quite well. And when he was so tired and sleepy in his OWL exam, I was right there with him. I was right on his heels as he was rushing through the DoM corridors in his dream, I wanted to know what was there just as much as he did. But when I discovered LV torturing Sirius, my mind started screaming "This is SO wrong !". It was impossible, and the more I read, the less possible and realistic it seemed to me. Steve wrote : "Harry's 'I've got to do something', is my, as a reader, equal need and determination for 'What happens next! What happens next!'. That immediate desire for /action/ prevents me, personally, from pausing to wonder. Harry's need for /action/, some action - any action, is what prevents him from pausing for logical analysis. " Del replies : I'm all for action ! But when I see Harry rushing into something that has "bad idea" written all over, I can't help but want him to stop and think just for 2 minutes. Del From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Mon Nov 1 15:49:59 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Mon, 01 Nov 2004 15:49:59 -0000 Subject: Harry, Hermione, Sirius, and the Dream, 2-way mirror In-Reply-To: <20041031.223137.5428.0.annegirl11@juno.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 116945 Juli wrote : "Besides Hermione shouldn't have said that LV trusted Harry's saving people's thing, it was extremely rude." Aura answered : "She may have been going for tough love. " Del replies : Agreed. It was rude, for sure, but it was true, it was exactly what was happening. However, Hermione should have known that this would only antagonise Harry even further. It was true, but not smart. Aura asked : " Side note: WHY WHY WHY didn't Hermione talk to Snape?! He was right there, in the castle, 5 minutes away. She may dislike him, but she's got enough sense to know he's genuinly in the Order. So frustrating!" Del replies : Hermione, Ron and Ginny, they all knew about Snape being in the Order. OK Ron, I could understand that he wouldn't think of Snape. But the girls ?? Even if they didn't dare suggesting it to Harry, they could have gone and talked to Snape themselves. As you say, it's frustrating. Aura wrote : " This is what bugs me about Harry as hero: Up until OOtP, he's been lucky. That's it, that's the ONLY reason he's still alive to be called a hero." Del replies : Personally, it's not so much the fact that he was lucky that bothers me (luck is an indispensable part of a hero's equipment). It's the fact that people who should know better keep depending so much on his luck. I mean, the number of times someone in charge (DD most often, but some others too) could have said : "Oops, I screwed up, good thing you got lucky." And yet they keep doing it ! Del From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Mon Nov 1 16:19:23 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Mon, 01 Nov 2004 16:19:23 -0000 Subject: Ron's bad behaviour. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 116946 Alla wrote: "I see nothing unusual in Ron's behaviour. He got gealous (IMO), he got over it." Eggplant answered : "I happen to think that's a very big deal, I think it would permanently poison most friendships, it's just lucky for Ron that Harry has a forgiving nature. Few people are fortunate enough to have a friend as good as Harry and Ron almost threw it away." Del replies : As usual, this all comes down to what we each consider as being really bad. You think what Ron did was awful, and I think what Harry did throughout OoP was horrible. You say Ron is lucky to have such a friend as Harry, I say Harry is just as lucky to have such friends as Ron and Hermione. You say Ron is lucky Harry has a forgiving nature, I say Harry is lucky Ron and Hermione are so forgiving, understanding and patient. Eggplant wrote : " He had a fight with his best friend and it was more than just a little spat, it lasted about a month. Remember this was a friend who saved his sister's life, a friend who demonstrated a willingness to risk his own life to save Ron too.I understand why he had the fight, he was jealous of Harry, and I understand why he was jealous, he was insecure; however understanding why somebody is obnoxious does not make him one bit less obnoxious." Del replies : Ron risked his life for Harry right back in PS/SS, and then again in CoS, and in PoA. Maybe Ron was obnoxious in GoF, but Harry was just as obnoxious in OoP. Eggplant wrote : "Poor Harry was going through a very difficult time, he was scared to death he was going to get killed in the first task of the Tri-Wizard tournament, or even worse, make a complete fool of himself. " Del replies : But he didn't say so to Ron. He tried, but he didn't tell Ron the whole truth. Was Ron supposed to read his mind or something ? Eggplant wrote : "He was really at a low point in his life, everybody except Hermione thought he was a liar, he was worried Sirius would get caught, most of the students seemed to hate him, he was depressed, he was terrified, and he needed moral support from Ron. He didn't get it. " Del replies : Remember Hermione in PoA ? She did something Harry didn't like, and as a result Harry let her stew in her own juices for weeks, even after Hagrid pointed out how badly she needed her friends. Eggplant wrote : "Everybody has problems growing up but it seems to me Ron's childhood was pretty wonderful, as close to being perfect as anybody ever had. " Del replies : Does that mean that we should expect Ron to be perfect ? He's as much as teenage boy as Harry. Del From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Mon Nov 1 16:39:55 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Mon, 01 Nov 2004 16:39:55 -0000 Subject: Ron's bad behaviour. Was: Re: What should Harry REALLY feel sorry for? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 116947 Ginger: > "Harry," [Ron] said seriously, "whoever put your name in that > goblet- I-I reckon they're trying to do you in!" > It was as though the last few weeks had never happened-as though > Harry were meeting Ron for the first time, right after he'd been > made champion. > "Caught on, have you?" Harry said coldly. "Took you long enough." > (snip text) Ron opened his mouth uncertainly. Harry knew Ron was > about to apologize and suddenly he found he didn't need to hear it. > End quoted section. > > After that Ron does try, and Harry doesn't let him finish, and they > both end up grinning at each other. > > I quoted that whole thing because it has always wondered me about > the "it was as though the last few weeks had never happened" part. > Is this Harry's POV? Ron's? I really don't understand that part. > Any takers on de-confusing me? SSSusan: Good question. I suppose it could just be Harry's perspective and that Ron didn't feel the same, but I admit that I took it to mean it was true for them BOTH. I know there have been times in my life when I've been either angry at someone or fretting that they're angry with me...or when we have actually exchanged words...but once it's been made right or the air's been cleared, it does feel like everything's back to normal. That's how I took this here--that things were suddenly so right again that the intervening weeks didn't matter any more. My two knuts, Siriusly Snapey Susan From spotthedungbeetle at hotmail.com Mon Nov 1 16:50:50 2004 From: spotthedungbeetle at hotmail.com (dungrollin) Date: Mon, 01 Nov 2004 16:50:50 -0000 Subject: Ron's bad behaviour. Was: Re: What should Harry REALLY feel sorry for? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 116948 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "cubfanbudwoman" wrote: > > Ginger: > > "Harry," [Ron] said seriously, "whoever put your name in that > > goblet- I-I reckon they're trying to do you in!" > > It was as though the last few weeks had never happened-as though > > Harry were meeting Ron for the first time, right after he'd been > > made champion. > > "Caught on, have you?" Harry said coldly. "Took you long > > enough." > > (snip text) Ron opened his mouth uncertainly. Harry knew Ron > > was about to apologize and suddenly he found he didn't need to > > hear it. > > End quoted section. > > > > After that Ron does try, and Harry doesn't let him finish, and > > they both end up grinning at each other. > > > > I quoted that whole thing because it has always wondered me > > about the "it was as though the last few weeks had never > > happened" part. Is this Harry's POV? Ron's? I really don't > > understand that part. > > Any takers on de-confusing me? > > SSSusan replied: > Good question. I suppose it could just be Harry's perspective and > that Ron didn't feel the same, but I admit that I took it to mean > it was true for them BOTH. > > I know there have been times in my life when I've been either > angry at someone or fretting that they're angry with me...or when > we have actually exchanged words...but once it's been made right > or the air's been cleared, it does feel like everything's back to > normal. That's how I took this here--that things were suddenly so > right again that the intervening weeks didn't matter any more. > > My two knuts, > Siriusly Snapey Susan Dungrollin: Yeah, and boys don't generally go in for the 'Well, I just felt really hurt because...' and 'But when you said *that*, *I* thought that...' that girls go in for. No need to pick it all over: it's over, they can forget about it. Hermione does feel the need to burst into tears and call them both stupid at this point, though, doesn't she? From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Mon Nov 1 17:07:59 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Mon, 01 Nov 2004 17:07:59 -0000 Subject: What were the corridor dreams ? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 116949 While answering other threads, I realised that one of my problems is that I still don't have a definite idea of what the corridor dreams Harry's been having all year long in OoP actually are. Here are the facts I've managed to assemble for now, and some questions they raised for me. 1. The dreams are accurate. When Harry finally ends up going to the DoM, things are exactly like in his dreams. 2. LV never went there in his new body. If he had, he would have taken the Prophecy off the shelf himself. 3. LV went there once as a snake and Harry happened to witness that time. Was it the only time LV tried that ? If not, how come Harry saw that time ? 4. It appears that well into OoP, LV was not even aware that nobody but he and Harry could pick up the Prophecy. Instead he tried to force other people to do it for him. This to me strongly indicates that he had no intention to go there himself. 5. The dreams started long before LV even thought of using Harry to pick the Prophecy up. 6. The dreams became longer and longer, and yet it took almost a year for them to reach their end. Why ? So finally I reach my real question : what were those dreams ??? Here are some ideas I've had. 1. They were real dreams that LV was having every night. I don't think so, for many reasons, like for example : - Dreams are not reasonable, like those visions were. They go in many different ways. - Why would Harry share only those dreams ? - LV would have to be *very* obsessed to dream of that corridor every single night. - There's no reason those dreams should have been longer over time. 2. They were dreams LV was deliberately implanting in Harry's mind. I doubt it, because : - LV wasn't apparently aware of the connection between him and Harry until the Snake Dream. - Why would LV want to inform Harry so early of the existence of a potential weapon against him (against LV, I mean) ? LV first did what seemed obvious : he tried to get people who had normal access to the Prophecy to steal it for him. It's only when he learned that only he and Harry could take the Prophecy that he conceived the much more hazardous plan of tricking Harry into taking the Prophecy. - LV isn't exactly patient. He wouldn't have made things last so long. Unless he couldn't manage to stay in Harry's mind long enough. But in that case, why not jump directly to the moments when Harry enters the different rooms, once he's been shown how to get there ? 3. They were real explorations of the DoM by LV in his body. Unlikely, because : - LV would have taken the Prophecy himself if he could. - I seem to remember that LV (or one of his DEs) specifically said that he didn't want to risk exposing himself to the Ministry. - The dreams wouldn't start and end like that each time. Each time Harry's dreams start in the corridor, and end somewhere in the DoM. The only thing that could explain this logically that I can think of, would be if Apparition is possible from outside the MoM to inside the corridor but not to inside the DoM, but Apparition from inside the DoM to outside the MoM is possible. Unlikely, IMO. - There would be no reason for Harry to follow LV into his wanderings each night. - There would be no reason for Harry to start following LV just when he's Apparating into the MoM until when he just Apparates away. Why not before this and/or after that ? 4. The only other possibility I can think of, is that those visions are real explorations of the DoM by LV *out of his body*. I like this one, because : - It would explain why the visions got longer over time : because LV managed to stay inside the DoM longer over time, before getting booted by some security device, or by his own inability to stay out of his body for long. - It would explain why Harry saw all of those visions : maybe the sheer effort of sending his spirit away from his body made LV's trips very accessible to Harry. Same with the Snake Vision. - It would explain why LV couldn't pick the Prophecy up even when he got in the Prophecy Room. - And most of all, it would explain how someone who had never been to the DoM could create such *accurate* visions of what it looks like. However, there's one thing this hypothesis doesn't explain : the last dream, Sirius's vision. If LV wasn't actually there torturing Sirius, how could he make Harry dream of it ? Unless, as Finwitch suggested, there were Transfigured or Polyjuiced people there pretending to be LV and Sirius. This would explain why it felt so real to Harry : because it WAS real. Del From Agent_Maxine_is at hotmail.com Mon Nov 1 17:09:40 2004 From: Agent_Maxine_is at hotmail.com (Brenda M.) Date: Mon, 01 Nov 2004 17:09:40 -0000 Subject: Zombie!Crouch? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 116950 >> from meckelburg, Post # 22615 >>> > In GoF Barty Crouch said he had turned his fathers corpse into a bone > before burying it. Why did he do that? When I read that, I thought of Voldemort using the "bone of the father" to get his body back. > > Could this bone-incident with Barty be a hint from JKR about Barty's soul. Voldemort was not dead, he just lacked a body. > Barty isn't dead either, he only lacks his soul. <<< Bren: That is a very good point. I did find it odd as well, that Barty Jr transfigured his father's corpse into a *bone* out of many other things he could have chosen. And yes, it smells fishy that no one bothered to retrieve the bone afterwards. >>> Kneasy: > What happened to B.Jnr after his snogging session with a Dementor? > Anyone know? Azkaban? St Mungo's? Fudge using him as a doorstop? > Mannequin at Madam Malkin's? Bren: HAHAHAHAHAHHA. Snogging session. How romantic. NOT. But yeah it is funny, where do the Dementor's Kiss victims end up? Do they end up back in Azkaban? Are they shipped to a separate cave or island isolated from the community? So their physiological functions are intact but no mentality, similar to what we call "vegetative state"? Perhaps their bodies are being experimented and studied, alive or dead, for scientific purposes. Like during World War II and such. Who knows. After all, Dementor's snog victims *are* the most dangerous criminals in WW, their civil rights would have been stripped away long ago. Brenda From luckdragon64 at yahoo.ca Mon Nov 1 18:03:21 2004 From: luckdragon64 at yahoo.ca (Bee Chase) Date: Mon, 1 Nov 2004 13:03:21 -0500 (EST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: A Spinners [of Tales] End ........Spinners End by Mary Minton In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041101180321.41827.qmail@web52004.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 116951 I'd be more inclined to think of this as the end of Lockhart as opposed to Luna. Lockhart is the spinner of many tales and has been showing signs of recovery and according to JKR he will reappear in the storyline. Luna on the other hand appears to have a good relationship with her father and they travel together.. so why would he hate her? LadyOfThePensieve wrote: Hi, I simply think this is a very interesting and crucial information. we laready know JKR based Mrs Norris on the Mrs Norris in Austen?s Emma. So why shouldn?t she be inspired by a book she probably read: Spinners End? --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "samnanya" wrote: > > Neri > Googling "Spinners End" I found that it is the name of > a romantic book by Mary Minton: http://www.alibris.com/ > search/search.cfm?qwork=6267239&matches=3&qsort=r > According to the book review this is a place in London, > but it doesn't appear like it really exists. > > Samnanya > Check the symmary and you will find that the story > (heavily snipped) is about Francine Chayter who visits > her father in London. She wants to know her father better > but he hates the sight of her. "an unexpected trip to > Monte Carlo brought her a suprise revelation about her > mother" > > Well............. which character in the potterverse is in > a somewhat similar situation? > who can "the spinner" be a reference to? > why would Luna's father "hate" her? > and what is the suprise revelation about her mother? > > > s > p > o > i > l > e > r > > > . > . > . > . > . > . > . > . > . > . > . > . > . > . > . > . > which character in the potterverse is in a somewhat > similar situation? Luna of course ....... > > who can "the spinner" be a reference to? Mr Lovegood, > editor and publisher of The Quibbler -- spinner can also > mean "spinner of tales" like her father always did in > articles printed in the Quibbler (someone creative has > to be making up those stories) > > why would Luna's father "hate" her? and > what is the suprise revelation about her mother? > Luna's dad can hate her because she was the indirect > cause of the death of his wife in that experiment that > went awfully wrong. What experiment? Some have said that > Luna was bitten by a werewolf as a child and her mom > tried to develop a charm, spell or potion to cure her. > The spell was not successful and her mom died trying to > save her daughter (sounds like a Lilly-like sacrifice to me) > We know the werewolf potion was a recent development > and that her mom died a year or so after harry entered > hogwarts. We know that Luna loves her dad, but can we > assume the opposite? > I wonder...... > > > So as I have said before, > > Mr. Lovegood WILL meet his end before the HBP is > too far along. > > the dark lord is seriously bothered with him since > he published the Harry interview > > Luna is still at Hogwarts looking for her stuff > after the end of term > > if they are going on vacation to sweden over the > summer then it would make sense for Mr Lovegood to > publish a final summer edition before leaving > giving Goyle Sr., who was not at the MoM prime opportunity > to trash the quibbler and kill Mr. Lovegood > > If you read this far without falling off your chair, > maybe you might actually think it is possible, or even > extend the RIP!MrLovegood theory. 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 --------------------------------- 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 nadinesaintamour at hotmail.com Mon Nov 1 19:17:05 2004 From: nadinesaintamour at hotmail.com (catimini15) Date: Mon, 01 Nov 2004 19:17:05 -0000 Subject: Felix Felicis (was : What we find there) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 116952 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "finwitch" wrote: > Felix Felicis... if not a person, it's a plant, an animal, a spell, a > magical phenomenon... I understand how one might think of cats, > though - I recall some cat-food by name of Felix, and there's that > FELINE also... but also that James Bond's CIA friend is named Felix > Leiter. (and all their secret weapons are a bit like magic! I wonder > how JKR feels of James Bond 007..) But I like the thought of FF being > the name of new DADA professor. (And I wonder where Aberforth lurks). > > Finwitch I don't know what or whom Felix Felicis(FF) will turn out to be but I would like to analyze FF as a proposition for a spell. With strong latin references like this, what else than a feel good spell Felix Felicis could be ? Don't we already have the Cheering Spell though ? The spell Hermione couldn't stop fussing about in PoA, remember ? I checked the Encyclopedia of Spells in the Lexicon and I found that the Cheering Spell was discovered by a certain Felix Summerbee (1447- 1508). Do we know the incantation for the Cheering Spell ? It could well be Felix Felicis. I think it already has been discussed that the latin word Felis (generic for cat) is derived from the older latin word Felix (meaning happy). Personally, I'd rather think that JKR has used the former reference and created a new character by the name of Felix Felicis who will, maybe, turn out to be a distant relative of Summerbee... (Ha ! It's a joke !) :-) The feline-looking character (new DADA teacher or not) described a couple of weeks ago on JKR's website is intriguing. There is already two strong ?real world? references that JKR could have drawn from for this cat-like character's name : Otto Messmer's Felix the Cat (like SSSusan suggested) and Felix - or rather Felis - Cattus, the domestic cat official zoologist's latin name. If FF doesn't turn out to be a spell, or the lion-like upcoming new character after all, we are left with a plant, a place, an animal or a magical phenomenon to ponder and guess upon until HBP is finally published. Nadine From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Mon Nov 1 19:18:26 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Mon, 01 Nov 2004 19:18:26 -0000 Subject: What we find there (was: How to Get Through the Door)--SPOILERS!!! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 116953 > > SSSusan wrote: > > > > S > > P > > O > > I > > L > > E > > R > > S > > P > > A > > C > > E > > DON'T READ FURTHER IF YOU WANT TO FIND THIS OUT FOR YOURSELF > > > > > > I MEAN IT!! > > > > > > > > So the three chapters are: > > Spinners End > > Draco's Detour > > Felix Felicis > > 3) Given how lion-like the previous description was that JKR gave > us, and Felix the Cat, FELine, etc., how 'bout Felix Felicis for the new DADA professor? But chapter 14? Would it really be FOURTEEN > > chapters before we even meet the new DADA prof? Jeepers, I hope > not, as we'd probably be looking at a 50-chapter book, and then we'll NEVER get it! > > > Marcela They have been 'spinning' > the news, trying to look good even though they were in bad shape... > Jo told us that Fudge will be replaced, she was very sure of it ages > ago, like she had written that chapter, proofed-read it and given it > the 'OK, to go' green light... Carol notes: Actually, she corrected "Proofread" to read, as the chapters are still in manuscript (her typed version, probably printed from floppy disks, judging from her desk), not in proofs (typeset and ready for corrections by a professional proofreader). > Marcela: > As for Felix Felicis, those are latin terms related to 'happy' not > cats. Like you, I first thought that it could very well be the name > for the new DADA teacher, but chapter 14 is much too late to > introduce a new teacher, unless Book 6 has the longest Summer break > in all the HP books... I guess anything could be plausible, even > that Felix is the half blood prince, but we'll just have to wait... Carol responds: Yes, but Felix the Cat is almost certainly a pun that JKR would appreciate: "felix" (happy), "felis" (cat). I'm guessing that Felix was a common name for cats from Roman times onward. So Felix Felicis (Felix the Catlike?? but also Happy Happy, Lucky Lucky, Fortunate Fortunate??) could well be the tawny-haired, lionlike man, though his slight limp (IIRC) indicates that he hasn't always been fortunate. That type of pun or double meaning strikes me as very much in keeping with JKR's style. As SSS noted, Chapter 14 is much too late to meet the new DADA professor, unless he's been mysteriously delayed (and Snape has been subbing!). I'm guessing that he's the new MoM, or a member of the Order (possibly an auror) whom Harry meets at Christmas time when he returns to 12 GP (or wherever Order HQ is now). And FF could conceivably be the HBP--though what role he might have originally played in CoS escapes me entirely. The name sounds rather aristocratic, even princely, although the naming pattern (alliterating with Latin elements) also fits what we've seen of the pureblood tradition. He could be pureblood on his father's side and Muggle aristocracy on his mother's, but a prince? How? Wonderful. Now I've confused myself. But I do think there's a felix/felis pun here and that FF is the lionlike man. Carol, with apologies for not having read the whole thread before responding From chrissilein at yahoo.com Mon Nov 1 19:27:45 2004 From: chrissilein at yahoo.com (LadyOfThePensieve) Date: Mon, 01 Nov 2004 19:27:45 -0000 Subject: Spinners End, website! Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 116954 Hi, if you want to learn about the real Spinners End in the UK then please check out the link. http://www.smbc.sandwell.gov.uk/urbanform/corporateproperty/industrialpropertyregister.htm#spinnersend Greetings From jolka55 at poczta.onet.pl Mon Nov 1 19:29:08 2004 From: jolka55 at poczta.onet.pl (Julia) Date: Mon, 01 Nov 2004 19:29:08 -0000 Subject: What should Harry REALLY feel sorry for? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 116955 Eggplant wrote: > > > and of course Harry trying to cast Crucio > > That may have been the wrong thing to do, I'm not sure, but I am > sure I'm delighted Harry did it. I don't want Harry to be TOO good, > it's saccharine, I want him to have an edge. > Julia: Yeah, I agree with you. I don't see trying to cast Crucio as a wrong thing too. I like reading about those bad sides of Harry's personality because they make him more real. Besides, I think he had rights to do that, even though didn't know how to cast the spell. Sirius died, and Harry once again lost his father... I wouldn't be surprised if he had tried to AK her. After all he didn't think properly then. Julia From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Mon Nov 1 19:49:57 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Mon, 01 Nov 2004 19:49:57 -0000 Subject: What we find there- Places - real and imagined In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 116956 Neri wrote: > > > > > > Spinners End certainly sounds like a place. IMO it is the Order's new HQ, or at least their safe place for Harry. > > bboyminn: > > > > Oddly enough Spinners End Industrial Park is just west of Birmingham near a suburd called */Dursley/*. > > Geoff: > There is no road called Spinners End listed in my "A to Z of Greater > London". Having lived in London for 45 years, I can recall no area > with such a name - unless it's tucked away well on the periphery in > one of the New Towns perhaps. Carol responds: I think you're both right that Spinners End is not only a place but a road. Doesn't "end" suggest a cul de sac, like Bag End in LOTR? I don't think it's a real road, though--probably a fictional one like Diagon Alley and Knockturn Alley, and possibly in that same (imaginary) section of London. As for the name itself, "spinners" could be intended literally: people (generally women) who spin thread from wool or other fibers, possibly still done in some magical way in the WW, so Spinners End would be the dead-end street where cloth is spun and perhaps woven (before going to Madame Malkin and her competitors to be fashioned into robes). But "spinners" could also suggest some mythical connotation: Clotho of the Three Fates again? In any case, I think Steve is probably correct that a house in Spinners End is the new Order headquarters, especially since it appears so early in the book and we know Harry won't be spending much time with the Dursleys. Carol From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Mon Nov 1 19:57:22 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Mon, 01 Nov 2004 19:57:22 -0000 Subject: The intended murder of Pettigrew and moral corruption (Was; Vengeance on Sna In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 116957 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "dumbledore11214" wrote: > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "eggplant9998" > wrote: > > snip. > > The Ministry was corrupt and incompetent, Harry should have known he > could not expect justice from those fools and let Sirius and Lupin > get on with it. > > > No, I think the biggest mistake Harry ever made in his life was in > > book 3. > > > > Alla: > > I agree with you in a sense that Peter is much much better off dead > (to warn you I am speaking as someone who does not believe in agent > Peter, but only in trator and Voldemort spy Peter), I also think > that Remus and Sirius should have go ahead and killed him and > produced his body to Dumbledore and Ministry. > > I have very little doubt that Harry would have forgiven them later > on. After all his justification for getting Peter to the minsitry > was that he does not want his father's best friends to become > killers, not that he (Harry) had warm and fuzzy feelings for him. > I think it also shows how much both Remus and Sirius love Harry - > that they were able to put aside perfectly justifiable feelings of > revenge over their traitorous friend because Harry said so. > > But I am also hesitant to call what Harry did a biggest mistake of > his life. He did what was right. Thirteen year old does not know > that Ministry is corrupt and expects justice. I see nothing worng > with that. Carol responds: Alla, just curious. How in your view would Sirius, an escaped convict, and Remus, a werewolf, have proven that the man they murdered was himself a murderer and a traitor? Would anyone, Fudge in particular, have listened to them? Wouldn't Sirius have been sent straight to the Dementors and Remus to Azkaban without a trial? IMO, Harry did more than save them from staining their souls with murder. He saved them both from fates worse than death. (If you've already answered this, please just direct me to the post, as I'm hopelessly behind.) Carol, who does at least know what's behind the door and thanks JKR for the Halloween treat! From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Mon Nov 1 20:24:11 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Mon, 01 Nov 2004 20:24:11 -0000 Subject: Such a searing pain... (Re: Harry's experiences : what's missing ?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 116958 Del wrote: > "Physical pain ? Well, I don't know for you, but I'm getting tired > of being told 10 times in each book that "Harry had never felt such > intense pain before". > To which SSSusan replied: > "Hallelujah & amen, Del!! I know some people find JKR's (over)use of > adverbs to be annoying. Well, I find her "searing" scar pain > and "never felt such intense pain before" lines to get really old. > There *has* to be a new way to express scar pain!" > Iris added: > Speaking of the `searing pain' expression > It can sound odd, but there's at least one advantage when you are > not a native English speaker: you need to read the books with your > dictionary at hand. > As you did, I noticed the repetitive use of `searing pain', and > needed to check my dictionary, because I didn't know what `searing' > meant. That's how I learned it comes from `to sear', a very > interesting verb if you consider it is associated with the double > idea of burning and drying out (if I'm mistaken, please be kind > enough to correct me). Carol notes: "Searing pain" is a cliche in English and I can see why SSS would be tired of it. To me "searing pain" suggest what a branded animal would feel as the red hot iron burnt through the hair and touched its flesh. There was also the old and terrible process of preventing infection by cauterizing a wound (applying a hot iron to it). That, I think, is the mental image JKR is trying to conjure--Harry being branded on the forehead in infancy and reliving that pain with ever greater intensity each time his scar hurts. I don't know whether this is relevant or not, but the Dark Marks are *burned* into the skin of the Death Eaters (possibly with a morsmordre curse), so they would quite literally have felt "searing pain" when the marks were applied, and possibly again when the mark "calls" them or when Voldemort fell. Possibly when Snape clutches his arm as Crouch!Moody calls him a "Death Eater who walked free," he is feeling a pain much like Harry's (a punishment, IMO, for his disloyalty to Voldemort, and a common bond with Harry if they only knew it). Just a thought. Carol From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com Mon Nov 1 20:26:40 2004 From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (arrowsmithbt) Date: Mon, 01 Nov 2004 20:26:40 -0000 Subject: What were the corridor dreams ? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 116959 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "delwynmarch" wrote: > > lotsa snips> > > 5. The dreams started long before LV even thought of using Harry to > pick the Prophecy up. > > 6. The dreams became longer and longer, and yet it took almost a year > for them to reach their end. Why ? > > So finally I reach my real question : what were those dreams ??? > > Here are some ideas I've had. > > 1. They were real dreams that LV was having every night. > > 2. They were dreams LV was deliberately implanting in Harry's mind. > I doubt it, because : > > 3. They were real explorations of the DoM by LV in his body. > Unlikely, because : > > 4. The only other possibility I can think of, is that those visions > are real explorations of the DoM by LV *out of his body*. > I like this one, because : I agree that there's something very odd about the whole episode. Consider: Only Harry or Voldy could take the globe from the shelf. Even if Voldy didn't know this I bet DD and those in the Order who worked at the Ministry did. So why have a guard on the door? Any of Voldy's hench-wizards grabbing the globe immediately gets stricken with the multiple congropolis or the galloping pox or whatever it was - and if Voldy himself turned up one dozy wizard isn't going to stop him. He'd breeze through him as if he wasn't there. In actual fact even if Voldy did get his hands on the globe, would it change anything? It's not as if he wasn't trying to knock off Harry at every opportunity anyway. The Prophesy would tell him nothing important. It's only use to the Order is as a decoy. But a decoy to what? And the only person worth placing a guard against is Harry himself. He could take the globe *and* he could be stopped by one wizard. Perhaps the dreams, or the later one's at least, were deliberate enticements. Get Harry fascinated (which he was) and he might do something about it. But he didn't. Not until that last dream which was different from the rest - it was in the daytime. Not only that, but Harry fell asleep in very curious circumstances - in the middle of an exam. A class maybe, with a droning voice pouring boring stuff into your ears, but an exam? Very odd. At just the right moment to catch that fake vision too. What a coincidence! I don't like coincidences like that. They make me suspicious. It makes me wonder if some of the other 'dreams', the ones after Arthur had been attacked, after Voldy realised that Harry was tuning in, were real either, 'cos he sees no guard from the Order there even though we know the Order has a rota. I think it highly likely that these dreams of dancing down Ministry corridors were not of the actuality, not after Arthur got bitten. Mind you, there's no guard the night that Harry finally drops in, something that has never been explained. It's another of those blank spots that leaves questions dangling. Was there no guard? If not why not? Had the DEs got rid of the guard - or had the guard let the DEs in? Co-operated, in fact. Then there's the strange thing - Voldy eventually turned up at the Ministry. Couldn't he have turned up an hour or two earlier and taken the globe himself? Why have a dozen or so DEs lurking behind the woodwork for - what, a couple of hours? Sitting around, hoping for, expecting Harry to turn up. Another couple of questions. How did they know that Harry could get away from Hogwarts? How did they know that Harry knew how to get into the Ministry? One possible answer is that Voldy can see through Harry's eyes, he knows what Harry's doing. He can affect Harry's behaviour, we know that (the urge to attack DD). But once you're in somebody's mind, not only can you rummage through memories, influence actions, you must know what they're doing - you're viewing it in real-time. He saw Harry coming. It's probably no accident that Harry's scar was prickling on a more or less continuous basis whereas before it only happened when Voldy was thinking about him, because Voldy is thinking about him -a lot. Harry's had a visitor. Has he gone yet? Kneasy From jolka55 at poczta.onet.pl Mon Nov 1 20:28:18 2004 From: jolka55 at poczta.onet.pl (Julia) Date: Mon, 01 Nov 2004 20:28:18 -0000 Subject: Ron's bad behaviour. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 116960 > Alla wrote: > "I see nothing unusual in Ron's behaviour. He got gealous (IMO), he > got over it." > > Eggplant answered : > "I happen to think that's a very big deal, I think it would > permanently poison most friendships, it's just lucky for Ron that > Harry has a forgiving nature. Few people are fortunate enough to have > a friend as good as Harry and Ron almost threw it away." > > Del answered : > As usual, this all comes down to what we each consider as being really > bad. You think what Ron did was awful, and I think what Harry did > throughout OoP was horrible. You say Ron is lucky to have such a > friend as Harry, I say Harry is just as lucky to have such friends as > Ron and Hermione. You say Ron is lucky Harry has a forgiving nature, I > say Harry is lucky Ron and Hermione are so forgiving, understanding > and patient. > Julia replies: I think that they are both lucky to have each other. But we should note that it is Ron who was brought up in a normal, loving family with six sibilings! And Harry - not only he is the only child (Dudley isn't his brother) but he has never had a proper family. IMO Ron should know that. And while Harry have "rights" to not know how to behave in such a situation (his lack of experience) Ron is the one who should know, react and understand Harry. Now, I'm impressed that Harry even though he had a REALLY hard childhood still has some priorities, is not spoiled and exists in society without problems. Jula From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Mon Nov 1 20:59:21 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Mon, 01 Nov 2004 20:59:21 -0000 Subject: What were the corridor dreams ? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 116961 Del: > > 5. The dreams started long before LV even thought of using Harry > > to pick the Prophecy up. > > > > 6. The dreams became longer and longer, and yet it took almost a > > year for them to reach their end. Why ? > > > > So finally I reach my real question : what were those dreams ??? > > > > Here are some ideas I've had. > > 1. They were real dreams that LV was having every night. > > 2. They were dreams LV was deliberately implanting in Harry's > > mind. > > 3. They were real explorations of the DoM by LV in his body. > > 4. The only other possibility I can think of, is that those > > visions are real explorations of the DoM by LV *out of his body*. Kneasy: > I agree that there's something very odd about the whole episode. > Consider: > Only Harry or Voldy could take the globe from the shelf. Even if > Voldy didn't know this I bet DD and those in the Order who worked > at the Ministry did. > So why have a guard on the door? > Any of Voldy's hench-wizards grabbing the globe immediately gets > stricken with the multiple congropolis or the galloping pox or > whatever it was - and if Voldy himself turned up one dozy wizard > isn't going to stop him. He'd breeze through him as if he wasn't > there. > > It makes me wonder if some of the other 'dreams', the ones > after Arthur had been attacked, after Voldy realised that Harry was > tuning in, were real either, 'cos he sees no guard from the Order > there even though we know the Order has a rota. I think it > highly likely that these dreams of dancing down Ministry corridors > were not of the actuality, not after Arthur got bitten. > > Mind you, there's no guard the night that Harry finally drops in, > something that has never been explained. It's another of those > blank spots that leaves questions dangling. Was there no guard? > If not why not? Had the DEs got rid of the guard - or had the > guard let the DEs in? Co-operated, in fact. SSSusan: This won't answer all these questions, for sure, but I wonder about this. Is it possible that the Order guard was there initially (that is, through the summer/at the start of the school year) as an information-gathering mechanism, rather than as a true *guard* trying to stop Voldy or his buddies from getting in? I know the impression we're given is that they were guarding the prophecy, but as you say, Harry doesn't see them in his dreams after the Arthur attack. Maybe once the Arthur attack happened, the Order knew all it needed to know: 1) Voldy & the DEs were, indeed, after the prophecy; and 2) Voldy was now aware of the mind-link. As you ask, does this mean the Order was using the prophecy as a decoy? And if so, for WHAT? (And it still doesn't answer why *not* guard HARRY.) Kneasy: > One possible answer is that Voldy can see through Harry's eyes, > he knows what Harry's doing. He can affect Harry's behaviour, we > know that (the urge to attack DD). But once you're in somebody's > mind, not only can you rummage through memories, influence > actions, you must know what they're doing - you're viewing it in > real-time. He saw Harry coming. SSSusan: Is it possible that this is one of the reasons DD had Snape do Occlumency lessons? To see if they could find out about those dreams Harry was having--how far they went; what he saw; what "position" he was in during them; whether they were changing? Siriusly Snapey Susan From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Mon Nov 1 21:11:00 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Mon, 01 Nov 2004 21:11:00 -0000 Subject: What should Harry REALLY feel sorry for? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 116962 > Julia: > > Yeah, I agree with you. I don't see trying to cast Crucio as a wrong > thing too. I like reading about those bad sides of Harry's > personality because they make him more real. Besides, I think he had > rights to do that, even though didn't know how to cast the spell. > Sirius died, and Harry once again lost his father... I wouldn't be > surprised if he had tried to AK her. After all he didn't think > properly then. > Alla: There is no doubt in my mind that Bella deserves to die ASAP and I love Harry having an edge. The reason why Harry needs to learn to control his emotions even at the time of greates pain is because performing an unforgivables on the frequent basis may corrupt HIS soul. Please note - I have no doubt that Harry will NOT perform unforgivables on the frequent basis. :) From dk59us at yahoo.com Mon Nov 1 21:14:24 2004 From: dk59us at yahoo.com (Eustace_Scrubb) Date: Mon, 01 Nov 2004 21:14:24 -0000 Subject: Detour (Was Re: Draco chapter) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 116963 SSSusan: > Well, *if* I'm right that the detour is to get Daddy out of Azkaban, > then I'd say, yes, Draco will be making his final decision for Team > Voldy. > > Some are thinking it could mean a redeemed Draco, but I just can't > imagine it. Very near the end of OotP we see Draco threatening > Harry over what he did to his father. If the Draco's Detour chapter > is only #6, it could potentially be only a matter of weeks between > the threat to Harry and this. Now, frankly, that threat sounded > pretty serious to me, and I don't think he'd change his mind and > become redeemed in a flash like that. (Then again, I'm not one to > hold out a lot of hope for a redeemed Draco at any point in the > septology.) Eustace_Scrubb: Well, I agree that it seems highly unlikely that Draco would "detour" off his life path, which seems to be something like "be worthy of your heritage." So...there are of course detours that are intentional (that is, one decides to take a detour) and then there are detours that are unintentional (for some reason one is forced to take a different route than one planned). Of course, there's at least one more detour type, the sort that you take because your name alliterates with the word "detour" and therefore makes a very snappy chapter title. I'll assume that the latter is _not_ the sort Draco takes. It seems as likely as not to me that Draco's detour will _not_ be one he intended. So many of his plans have gone awry over the years. Starting with one of my favorite lines in the whole series: "A Nimbus Two Thousand, sir...And it's really thanks to Malfoy here that I've got it." So perhaps he does try to spring Lucius from Azkaban, but ends up doing something completely unrelated. Then again, nobody seems to think that Azkaban is going to be very difficult for the DEs to break out of--Draco's "assistance" might not be needed or even welcome. Cheers, Eustace_Scrubb From dk59us at yahoo.com Mon Nov 1 21:30:46 2004 From: dk59us at yahoo.com (Eustace_Scrubb) Date: Mon, 01 Nov 2004 21:30:46 -0000 Subject: Spinners End/Mythology Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 116965 We know that JKR draws on a variety of folklores/mythologies for elements in the Harry Potter series. Perhaps this chapter title will turn out to be linked to one of the many tales involving spinners. From Greek myth alone, there's Clotho (one of the Fates), Arachne and Penelope (Odysseus' wife). There are important spinners in the Finnish Kalevala and other cultures' stories too. Just a thought. Cheers, Eustace_Scrubb From kelsey_dangelo at yahoo.com Mon Nov 1 17:02:59 2004 From: kelsey_dangelo at yahoo.com (Kelsey Dangelo) Date: Mon, 1 Nov 2004 09:02:59 -0800 (PST) Subject: Harry V In-Reply-To: <1099293205.4133.80055.m5@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <20041101170259.89465.qmail@web53109.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 116966 hogsheadbarmaid said: < Anyone want to tread this depressing road with me?>> Kelsey replies: I'll throw my blue featherboa around my neck and tread along this road with you! First of all, it's interesting (though I don't like it) that Harry would have to do something morally wrong to show to others that doing something morally wrong is morally wrong (the old saying "Why do we kill people who kill people to show that killing people is wrong?"). But what if he had to stop a friend/loved one who's possessed by Voldemort (sort of like the choice that Dumbledore had to make at the end of OOP)? Or what if he had to choose between two people he loves (i.e. Hermione and Ron)? Or what if he has to choose between bringing Sirius Black back to life and the life of someone (could be anyone, even someone who he doesn't know well)? I like your idea about the twins, how he has to let them be killed in order to show that the good side really is good because they won't sink to the moral level of the other side. This is cold/cruel and tottering on the edge of being bad in order to be good, but it would work against Harry's "saving-people thing" that makes him want to act rather than sit back. Kelsey, who loves Shakespeare and finds the use of MacBeth in the film appropriate, and thinks that Harry is already having Hamlet moments!!! __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Address AutoComplete - You start. We finish. http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From foxmoth at qnet.com Mon Nov 1 21:39:23 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Mon, 01 Nov 2004 21:39:23 -0000 Subject: What were the corridor dreams ? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 116967 Del: > 2. They were dreams LV was deliberately implanting in Harry's mind. > I doubt it, because : > - LV wasn't apparently aware of the connection between him and Harry until the Snake Dream. > - Why would LV want to inform Harry so early of the existence of a potential weapon against him (against LV, I mean) ? LV first did what seemed obvious : he tried to get people who had normal access to the Prophecy to steal it for him. It's only when he learned that only he and Harry could take the Prophecy that he conceived the much more hazardous plan of tricking Harry into taking the Prophecy.< Pippin: According to Dumbledore, the dreams prior to the snake vision were inadvertent on Voldemort's part. "Voldemort, of course, had been obsessed with the possibility of hearing the prophecy ever since he regained his body, and as he dwelled on the door, so did you, though you did not know what it meant." After the snake vision, Voldemort seems to have taken control of the dreams, which leads to an interesting question...how did he know Harry was having them? Apparently he sensed that from Harry's mind itself, since Harry hadn't yet told anyone about the dreams. There's a noteworthy increase in Harry's desire to get behind the door after the snake vision -- "Something he wanted with all his heart lay beyond....A prize beyond his dreams....If only his scar would stop prickling..then he would be able to think more clearly...."-OOPch 23. Voldemort seems to have been hoping that Harry would try to find his way past the door, but of course Harry didn't know how. That seems to have led Voldemort to spring Rookwood, former head of the Department of Mysteries, from Azkaban. After that, Harry begins to dream of what lies beyond the door. We can't say for sure that Voldemort himself was never in the corridor outside the Department of Mysteries. He doesn't seem to have been an outlaw at first -- remember the Black parents thought their son was a hero for joining him. He might have visited the Ministry openly earlier in his career. The other possibility is that the information came via legilimency from those who had been there, like Malfoy. I think I like that one better, because it also explains how Voldemort could bring Harry the further visions of what lay beyond the door. Once Rookwood was returned to his service, Voldemort was able to probe his mind for details of the Hall of Prophecy and how to get to it. I think the Rookwood vision was deliberate -- Voldemort knew Harry was inside his head and went over to look at the mirror deliberately to frighten him. (Spy in the order stuff -- those who are convinced that all current order members are saints can stop reading now ) Voldemort makes a big point of announcing that he's been on the wrong track and he is now taking a new tack. Why does he want Harry to know this? I suspect it's because Voldemort has already found out what he isn't supposed to know...that only he or Harry can take the prophecy. Assuming the directed dreams start immediately after the snake vision, that can only mean that Voldemort had already conceived the idea of getting Harry to take the prophecy for him -- and that means that someone inside the Order had already given him the information. It could have been Kreacher, but surely Kreacher would have been forbidden to repeat this? Pippin From cat_kind at yahoo.com Mon Nov 1 16:52:40 2004 From: cat_kind at yahoo.com (cat_kind) Date: Mon, 01 Nov 2004 16:52:40 -0000 Subject: Draco chapter (was: What we find there) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 116968 > Alla: > > Unless JKR drastically changed the story, I cannot see redeemed > Draco either. I agree with your reasoning, but my main cause for > disbelief as I said many times will be that we did not see ANY hints > of Draco redemption. It wil be rashed, unbelievable and out of > nowhere, IMO. catkind: Hmm, certainly I don't expect Malfoy jr redeemed by Chapter 6 of Bk 6. But Detour? Suggests to me we may see a bit more of the boy than we have so far, whether for good or for bad. Up to this point, Harry wouldn't be likely to know that Draco was going from A to B, let alone that he was doing it via C, let alone this fact being important enough to make a chapter heading. Mostly he just shows up long enough to be snarky or get beaten up or both. Detour via Azkaban? Maybe, but on the way from where to where? Harry's more likely to notice him detouring if they've made it back to school already. Detour to do something annoying en route from the Sorting Feast to the dungeons? Another wild suggestion as to how to get Draco into the book so early: Narcissa Black might feel obliged to attend Sirius' wake, at the mysterious Spinners End of course, with unwilling sprog in tow. (After all, it seems that wizard law will hand Grimmauld Place to either Narcissa or Bellatrix, if Sirius couldn't be disinherited neither can they. ) catkind (pulling its dunce's cap firmly down over its ears) From khinterberg at yahoo.com Mon Nov 1 21:41:39 2004 From: khinterberg at yahoo.com (khinterberg) Date: Mon, 01 Nov 2004 21:41:39 -0000 Subject: Prefects taking points-an explanation? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 116969 Everyone always points to the discussion between Ernie Macmillan and Draco about prefects taking points as a mistake on JKR's part. However, in my new US paperback edition, it's not a problem at all: "You can't take points from fellow prefects, Malfoy." Was this always there, or is it a new addition to the story to clear up the problem? khinterberg, who learned about the "Cat, Rat, and Lovell the Dog" under Richard III in history today and was reminded of PoA From chrissilein at yahoo.com Mon Nov 1 21:55:09 2004 From: chrissilein at yahoo.com (LadyOfThePensieve) Date: Mon, 01 Nov 2004 21:55:09 -0000 Subject: Spinners End in Sandwell (near Birmingham) and Dudley Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 116970 Hi, the town Sandwell near Birmingham is the place where the real Spinners End belongs to. It?s maybe interesting that the Sandwell community adjoin to Dudley. It?s a community in the very neighborhood of Sandwell. In Sandwell itself there are places and streets like Broomfield, Bromwich (which looks similar to "broomwitch"). Well, I think that?s quite interesting. Its?indeed a place as Snape is a real little town in England. Greetings From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Mon Nov 1 22:00:27 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Mon, 01 Nov 2004 22:00:27 -0000 Subject: Detour (Was Re: Draco chapter) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 116971 SSSusan: > > Well, *if* I'm right that the detour is to get Daddy out of > > Azkaban, then I'd say, yes, Draco will be making his final > > decision for Team Voldy. > > > > Some are thinking it could mean a redeemed Draco, but I just > > can't imagine it. Very near the end of OotP we see Draco > > threatening Harry over what he did to his father. If the > > Draco's Detour chapter is only #6, it could potentially be only > > a matter of weeks between the threat to Harry and this. Now, > > frankly, that threat sounded pretty serious to me, and I don't > > think he'd change his mind and become redeemed in a flash like > > that. (Then again, I'm not one to hold out a lot of hope for a > > redeemed Draco at any point in the septology.) Eustace_Scrubb: > Well, I agree that it seems highly unlikely that Draco > would "detour" off his life path, which seems to be something > like "be worthy of your heritage." > > So...there are of course detours that are intentional (that is, one > decides to take a detour) and then there are detours that are > unintentional (for some reason one is forced to take a different > route than one planned). Of course, there's at least one more > detour type, the sort that you take because your name alliterates > with the word "detour" and therefore makes a very snappy chapter > title. SSSusan: Hee! But seriously, that's a good point about unintentional detours. Kind of like what happened to Harry & Cedric when they touched the TWT Cup/portkey and found themselves in the graveyard. A detour for certain, and definitely an unintended one. Wonder who/what might lead Draco astray or pop him out of wherever he is for an unexpected trip elsewhere?? Would it be something *unpleasant*? (I hope!:-)) Eustace: > So perhaps he does try to spring Lucius from Azkaban, but ends up > doing something completely unrelated. Then again, nobody seems to > think that Azkaban is going to be very difficult for the DEs to > break out of--Draco's "assistance" might not be needed or even > welcome. SSSusan: It's interesting how quickly we've lost the idea that Azkaban is difficult to get out of. It took Sirius 12 years to do it and he was the *first*...but then those DEs broke out en masse, and I guess that's what has made us think it can happen again easily. Voldy's return & his alliance w/ the Dementors and all. Siriusly Snapey Susan From carolynwhite2 at aol.com Mon Nov 1 22:11:33 2004 From: carolynwhite2 at aol.com (carolynwhite2) Date: Mon, 01 Nov 2004 22:11:33 -0000 Subject: A Thought about the Secret Keeper Switch In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 116972 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "pippin_999" wrote: > > We've been wondering how two such clever people as James > and Sirius would manage to come up with such a half-baked > idea--if Voldemort came after Sirius, as he expected, how could > Sirius be sure he wouldn't give away the switch under torture? > > Well, there's that old standby, the suicide pill -- but maybe Sirius > and James were expecting Voldemort to come after Sirius > another way. I think they expected that the spy in the Order would > try to trick Sirius into giving him the secret. Sirius would pretend > to fall for it, and when Voldemort attacked the wrong place, it > would prove who the spy was. Thoughts? > > Pippin Carolyn: This begs all the old questions about how widely known the SK plan was amongst the Order. It also raises some curious questions about how James & Sirius thought others saw them. Why would any member of the Order think they could trick Sirius? He's supposed to be not only uber-smart, but James' loyally devoted friend. There is also the thought that this *was* the plan, but it was one suggested to James by Dumbledore, who had concerns about Sirius as well as other members of the Order. Whichever: are you suggesting that this plan was carried out, Sirius knowingly 'allowed' Peter to trick him, and was somehow interrupted in warning James that he had found the spy? Or told Lupin, before going to confront Peter? From spotthedungbeetle at hotmail.com Mon Nov 1 22:19:28 2004 From: spotthedungbeetle at hotmail.com (dungrollin) Date: Mon, 01 Nov 2004 22:19:28 -0000 Subject: Prefects taking points-an explanation? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 116973 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "khinterberg" wrote: > > Everyone always points to the discussion between Ernie Macmillan and > Draco about prefects taking points as a mistake on JKR's part. > However, in my new US paperback edition, it's not a problem at all: > > "You can't take points from fellow prefects, Malfoy." > > Was this always there, or is it a new addition to the story to clear > up the problem? > > khinterberg, who learned about the "Cat, Rat, and Lovell the Dog" > under Richard III in history today and was reminded of PoA Dungrollin: Goodness me! I bought a UK paperback of OotP the other day, and it says the same! Followed by: 'I know *prefects* can't dock points from each other,' sneered Malfoy. Crabbe and Goyle sniggered. 'But members of the Inquisitorial Squad -' It's definitely new. My hardback's got the old: 'It's only teachers who can dock points from houses, Malfoy,' said Ernie at once. 'Yeah, we're prefects too, remember?' Snarled Ron. 'I know *prefects* can't dock points, Weasel King,' sneered Malfoy. Crabbe and Goyle sniggered. 'But members of the Inquisitorial Squad -' She changed it when we weren't looking! From carolynwhite2 at aol.com Mon Nov 1 22:24:26 2004 From: carolynwhite2 at aol.com (carolynwhite2) Date: Mon, 01 Nov 2004 22:24:26 -0000 Subject: What were the corridor dreams ? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 116974 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "pippin_999" wrote: > > (Spy in the order stuff -- those who are convinced that all current > order members are saints can stop reading now ) > > Voldemort makes a big point of announcing that he's been on > the wrong track and he is now taking a new tack. Why does he > want Harry to know this? I suspect it's because Voldemort has > already found out what he isn't supposed to know...that only he > or Harry can take the prophecy. > > Assuming the directed dreams start immediately after the snake > vision, that can only mean that Voldemort had already conceived > the idea of getting Harry to take the prophecy for him -- and that > means that someone inside the Order had already given him the > information. It could have been Kreacher, but surely Kreacher > would have been forbidden to repeat this? > Carolyn (having no problem seeing spies round every corner ): Why hasn't Voldemort got this information out of Rookwood before? He's been obsessing about the prophecy for nearly 17 years, and Rookwood's not been locked up that long. Weak link amongst the DE's too ? Rookwood thinking it's as well to be economical with the truth? From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Mon Nov 1 22:26:28 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Mon, 01 Nov 2004 22:26:28 -0000 Subject: Ron's bad behaviour. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 116975 Julia wrote : " But we should note that it is Ron who was brought up in a normal, loving family with six sibilings! And Harry - not only he is the only child (Dudley isn't his brother) but he has never had a proper family. IMO Ron should know that. And while Harry have "rights" to not know how to behave in such a situation (his lack of experience) Ron is the one who should know, react and understand Harry." Del replies : I would agree, if Ron's role models hadn't been Percy and the Twins. Ron grew up watching his 3 older brothers fighting constantly. Percy was always trying to force the Twins to do things "right", and the Twins constantly made fun of him or simply ignored him. And when a serious disagreement comes between them in OoP, we see how all 3 react, and it's not pretty. Julia wrote : " Now, I'm impressed that Harry even though he had a REALLY hard childhood still has some priorities, is not spoiled and exists in society without problems." Del replies : I'm very impressed too. Del From antoshachekhonte at yahoo.com Mon Nov 1 22:27:25 2004 From: antoshachekhonte at yahoo.com (antoshachekhonte) Date: Mon, 01 Nov 2004 22:27:25 -0000 Subject: The REAL Spinners End (Was Re: A Spinners [of Tales] End...) In-Reply-To: <20041101180321.41827.qmail@web52004.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 116976 > LadyOfThePensieve wrote: > Hi, > > I simply think this is a very interesting and crucial information. we > laready know JKR based Mrs Norris on the Mrs Norris in Austen?s Emma. > So why shouldn?t she be inspired by a book she probably read: Spinners > End? > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "samnanya" wrote: > > > > Neri > > Googling "Spinners End" I found that it is the name of > > a romantic book by Mary Minton: http://www.alibris.com/ > > search/search.cfm?qwork=6267239&matches=3&qsort=r > > According to the book review this is a place in London, > > but it doesn't appear like it really exists. > > > > Samnanya > > Check the symmary and you will find that the story > > (heavily snipped) is about Francine Chayter who visits > > her father in London. She wants to know her father better > > but he hates the sight of her. "an unexpected trip to > > Monte Carlo brought her a suprise revelation about her > > mother" > > > > Well............. which character in the potterverse is in > > a somewhat similar situation? > > who can "the spinner" be a reference to? > > why would Luna's father "hate" her? > > and what is the suprise revelation about her mother? > > > > > > s > > p > > o > > i > > l > > e > > r > > > > > > . > > . > > . > > . > > . > > . > > . > > . > > . > > . > > . > > . > > . > > . > > . > > . > > which character in the potterverse is in a somewhat > > similar situation? Luna of course ....... > > > > who can "the spinner" be a reference to? Mr Lovegood, > > editor and publisher of The Quibbler -- spinner can also > > mean "spinner of tales" like her father always did in > > articles printed in the Quibbler (someone creative has > > to be making up those stories) > > > > why would Luna's father "hate" her? and > > what is the suprise revelation about her mother? > > Luna's dad can hate her because she was the indirect > > cause of the death of his wife in that experiment that > > went awfully wrong. What experiment? Some have said that > > Luna was bitten by a werewolf as a child and her mom > > tried to develop a charm, spell or potion to cure her. > > The spell was not successful and her mom died trying to > > save her daughter (sounds like a Lilly-like sacrifice to me) > > We know the werewolf potion was a recent development > > and that her mom died a year or so after harry entered > > hogwarts. We know that Luna loves her dad, but can we > > assume the opposite? > > I wonder...... > > > > > > So as I have said before, > > > > Mr. Lovegood WILL meet his end before the HBP is > > too far along. > > > > the dark lord is seriously bothered with him since > > he published the Harry interview > > > > Luna is still at Hogwarts looking for her stuff > > after the end of term > > > > if they are going on vacation to sweden over the > > summer then it would make sense for Mr Lovegood to > > publish a final summer edition before leaving > > giving Goyle Sr., who was not at the MoM prime opportunity > > to trash the quibbler and kill Mr. Lovegood > > > > If you read this far without falling off your chair, > > maybe you might actually think it is possible, or even > > extend the RIP!MrLovegood theory. > > Antosha: Hmmmm. I find the idea of JKR using the title of a novel possibly interesting but, in this case, highly unlikely. No offense meant to Ms. Minton, author of _Spinners End_, but she's no Jane Austen (few if any are). The novel is recent (about fifteen years old) and still in print, so JKR would be running the risk of copyright infringement, even if this were the case. I do hope we get to know more about Luna and Dad, but it seems unlikely that the title refers to them--we know (or reasonably surmise) that they live in Ottery St. Catchpole, along with the Weasleys and Diggorys, and if the title is a possessive as opposed to a place name, it seems more likely that it refers to something less obscure that a (tale)spinner's end... However, I have turned up a likely candidate for the source of the name of both JKR and Mary Minton's works. Spinners End is.... W A I T F O R I T . . . An industrial estate (read industrial park) in Cradley Heath, the West Midlands, just west of Birmingham. It is spelled, btw, without an apostrophe. From gbannister10 at aol.com Mon Nov 1 22:30:59 2004 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Mon, 01 Nov 2004 22:30:59 -0000 Subject: Spinners End in Sandwell (near Birmingham) and Dudley In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 116977 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "LadyOfThePensieve" wrote: > > Hi, > > the town Sandwell near Birmingham is the place where the real Spinners > End belongs to. > > It?s maybe interesting that the Sandwell community adjoin to > Dudley. > It?s a community in the very neighborhood of Sandwell. Geoff: Sandwell was a name which appeared in the 1970s when a number of administrative reorganisations took place and obscure names surfaced for the new boroughs - Sandwell, Hyndburn, Thamesdown and Waveney come to mind. It isn't near Birmingham, it's part of Birmingham. The whole area is now administratively the West Midlands including Brum (the nickname for Birmingham), Coventry, Walsall and Wolverhampton inter alia. LadyOfThePensieve: > In Sandwell itself there are places and streets like Broomfield, > Bromwich (which looks similar to "broomwitch"). Geoff: There is no place called Bromwich (pronounced "Brommitch" BTW - silent "w"s are not uncommon in a number of UK town names). There is West Bromwich, which as its name suggests is on the west side of Birmingham and gthere is Castle Bromwich, more on the north side. LadyOfThePensieve: > Well, I think that?s quite interesting. > > Its?indeed a place as Snape is a real little town in England. Geoff: I think UK readers would prefer "small" town. We often get jokes about stereotype Americans making remarks about "little ol' England" so "real little" tends to evoke a measure of mirth. Snape is a town in East Anglia near the coast in Suffolk and is world- renowned for the Maltings Concert Hall which is associated with the composer Benjamin Britten. End of geography lesson. :-) Curious that my mind is trying to connect Smeltings with Maltings - Oh perhaps I've just read too many HP theories lately..... Geoff Pay a virtual visit to Exmoor and the preserved West Somerset Railway at: http://www.aspectsofexmoor.com From iris_ft at yahoo.fr Mon Nov 1 22:32:31 2004 From: iris_ft at yahoo.fr (iris_ft) Date: Mon, 01 Nov 2004 22:32:31 -0000 Subject: Two-way mirrors (Re: Harry, Hermione, Sirius, and the ....) In-Reply-To: <20041031.223137.5428.0.annegirl11@juno.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 116978 In http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/116914, Aura quoted Juli : > On another idea, WHY didn't he open Sirius' package (the 2 way > mirror)?? And then replied: >That was just ... bad writing. Sorry, but, that was rediculous. I don't >think JKR meant to taunt us with, "oh, the irony! he could have saved >Sirius!" or to trivialize Sirius' death by showing us that it could have >been easily averted. But that's how it came off. FWIW, she's said that 1) >the mirror probably wouldn't have helped as much as we think it would and >2) aluded to a magical device important in the next book that is better >than cell phones, so I suppose the mirror will be it. So it was >introduced because it'll be important later. Hi, Talking about mirrors that's what I see in them when they reflect the Potterverse. Forgive me if it happens to repeat something already "debated to death"; currently, I don't have all the time I whish I had to read the messages. The two-way mirror reminds me the Mirror of Erised. It's probably nothing but one more speculation. I don't know why, perhaps it's because of Lewis Carroll and Jean Cocteau, but since the first time I read PS/SS the chapter concerning the Mirror of Erised, I've been thinking it could be a two-way mirror. I always thought that the sentence written `back to front' on the frame wasn't just a pleasant detail, a game between JKR and her readers. I suppose it's written `back to front' because it's actually the reverse of an inscription you can read `normally' when you stand on the other side of the mirror. The Mirror of Erised could be just like the Stone Arch in the Death Chamber: a gate between two worlds, two dimensions or two realities. JKR herself suggests that the Mirror could be just a gate, when she writes in PS/SS (chapter 12): "The Potters smiled and waved at Harry and he stared hungrily back at them, his hand pressed flat against the glass as though he was hoping* to fall right through it* and reach them." And at the end of the book, the Philosopher's Stone passes through the mirror, from Harry's reflection to Harry himself. One last detail. You probably all know what JKR said concerning the PoA movie (Forgive me, kind little list elves; I know this is not the movie list): some details anticipate what happens in the two last books. I know we need to be careful with "movie contamination", but did you notice what happens during Lupin's Boggart class? We see a huge wardrobe with a mirror. In the mirror, we can see the students' reflection. The camera moves forward, `passes through' the mirror, and joins the students, who are waiting for the class to begin. The same thing happens at the end of the class, and this time the camera moves `through the mirror', from Harry himself to his reflection. I've read some say this scene is a goof, because the scar on Harry's forehead `is not at the right place': in fact we are facing Harry's reflection, but the camera movement gives the impression that we are facing Harry himself (hope I'm not too messy here!). Maybe that's one of the `foreshadowing details'? We pass `through the mirror' If you are not convinced, well see the movie again. Back to the books. The Mirror, in PS/SS, represents the seventh ordeal Harry has to pass through on his journey to the Stone. Well, I suppose we'll see it again (the Mirror, or something similar) in the seventh book. And, why not, Sirius' small mirror might play a part in the outcome. Simply because mirrors, small or huge, play an important part in initiatory processes, like Alchemy and its "satellites". For example, they are used in the Masonic loges; the initiate is locked in what they call a `meditation room', where he/she finds a curtain and the following sentence: `If you have a genuine wish, if you possess courage and intelligence, draw this curtain.' I saw one of those cabinets once in Venice. I drew the curtain, and faced my own reflection in a mirror. I'm not a Mason myself, but the message seemed to be quite clear: `Face what you are; face your own consciousness'. I suppose it's what Harry will have to do if he wants to defeat Voldemort. In OotP, he's not ready to do it, as JKR states on her website. She writes: "[ ] the short answer is that Harry was determined never to use the mirror, as is clearly stated in chapter 24: `he knew he would never use whatever it was'. For once in Harry's life, he does not succumb to curiosity, he hides the mirror and the temptation away from himself, and then, when it might have been useful, he has forgotten it." In my opinion, Harry doesn't want to use the mirror because he worries for Sirius, and doesn't want to endanger him. It's because he loves his godfather, but also because of what happened before Christmas, because of the nightmare he had in which he `was' a snake and `attacked' Arthur Weasley. At that moment, when he is given the mirror, Harry is afraid of himself. He doesn't know what is going on, and he probably prefers not to know, because he feels he could discover terrible things, things he is not ready to face yet. That's probably why the Occlumency lessons are pointless. They don't work, maybe not because Harry doesn't want to learn, or because Snape is a `bad' teacher. Harry fails because he's not ready to learn, because he's afraid of what is hidden in his heart, in his soul. He's afraid of what he could be, of what he could become. So he doesn't want to face himself, to face this consciousness the Occlumency lessons make him feel painfully. His scar burns when he tries to learn; it burns because consciousness is a burning thing. We can't blame him for trying to avoid the pain, for trying to forget. Okay, say I always repeat the same thing. But the more I consider on one hand Alchemy and its "satellites", and on the other hand, the Harry Potter series, the more I feel the solution is hidden in Harry's heart. He simply needs to find his own key, and it's not necessarily a complex process. It could be as simple as a direct look at who he is, at what he wants to be. Harry will have to learn to face himself in order to defeat Voldemort; he will have to face his own heart and soul. It's a vital question: Voldemort didn't manage to face his own consciousness; we see the result. `Erised stra ehru oyt ube cafru oyt on wohsi'; `I show not your face but your heart's desire': how could Harry learn better than facing a Mirror of Erised? Two Knuts, and just my opinion, Amicalement, Iris From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Mon Nov 1 22:46:49 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Mon, 01 Nov 2004 22:46:49 -0000 Subject: What should Harry REALLY feel sorry for? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 116979 Pippin: > I think the one thing he should really feel sorry for is blaming > Sirius's death on Snape. Granted, he has not done anything > about this feeling yet, but he will, and I think it will be the > biggest mistake he ever makes. Alla: Oh, of course I disagree. :) You know how I feel about it. If oclumency disaster does not show any other hidden meanings, Snape is so guilty or at least complicit in Sirius'death. Sure, Dumbledore shares the blame, sure Harry has his part of blame too, but I disagree that Harry should feel sorry for this feeling. He needs to work through it, absolutely, but not just feel sorry that he blames Snape and forget about it. Pippin: > Harry blames Snape for stopping the Occlumency lessons > (while simultaneously thinking Snape might have been using > them to soften him up for Voldemort), Alla: Yes, he does, but so far we don't have any information yet pointing us to the contrary, right? I mean, I'll concede it is likely that Snape was not softening him up to Voldemort, but I don't think it is irrational for Harry to think so. He did feel worse after lessons, didn't he? Pippin: for taunting Sirius into > leaving the house, Alla: True, but Harry saw enough of Snape taunting Sirius in OOP, I think it is rational for him to think that Snape did the same att he end, even if Harry is wrong. Pippin: and for pretending not to understand him in > front of Umbridge. Alla: Yes, this is not very rational. Pippin: IMO, and canon says > straight out that Harry wants to believe Snape is at fault to ease > his own sense of guilt. > Alla: I don't think it is mutually excusive. Harry correctly blames himself, but Snape also has his fair share of blame. From foxmoth at qnet.com Mon Nov 1 22:48:11 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Mon, 01 Nov 2004 22:48:11 -0000 Subject: A Thought about the Secret Keeper Switch In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 116980 Pippin: > but maybe Sirius and James were expecting Voldemort to come after Sirius another way. I think they expected that the spy in the Order would try to trick Sirius into giving him the secret. Sirius would pretend to fall for it, and when Voldemort attacked the wrong place, it would prove who the spy was. Thoughts?< > Carolyn: > This begs all the old questions about how widely known the SK plan was amongst the Order.< Pippin: We know that at least Sirius, James, Lily, Dumbledore and Lupin knew about the SK plan, and that Lupin was told about the plan but not the switch. Obviously James and Sirius suspected Lupin, and perhaps others as well, but couldn't prove who the spy was. Carolyn: > It also raises some curious questions about how James & Sirius thought others saw them. Why would any member of the Order think they could trick Sirius? He's supposed to be not only uber-smart, but James' loyally devoted friend.< Pippin: I didn't phrase that very well -- as we learned in OOP, it wouldn't be enough for the spy to be told the secret. It had to be in transmittable form so that it could be passed on to Voldie. This was where the trickery would come in. The spy was a close friend of the Potters, someone who would expect to be let in on the secret. Believing himself unsuspected, he would offer some plausible and innocent sounding reason why he should be given the secret in writing. Sirius would pretend to hand over the secret (it could even be the actual secret), but when Voldemort showed up to attack, he wouldn't be able to find anything, and the spy would be exposed. In the event, the plan was not carried out fully, because instead of trying to use the spy to extract the secret from Sirius, Voldemort was able to discover for himself who the real Secret-Keeper was. I, of course, continue to believe that Peter was himself betrayed, but that's not necessary for the understanding of this theory. Pippin From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Mon Nov 1 22:53:08 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Mon, 01 Nov 2004 22:53:08 -0000 Subject: Unreliable narrator (Was: Snape's stalling) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 116981 Alla wrote: > > Oh, I disagree with that logic, Pippin. It reminds me of "Harry is > an unreilable narrator" argument, when it comes to Snape. > > I think personally that the importance of such argument is GREATLY > exaggerated. Sure, Harry is quite an unreliable narrator in PS/SS, > because he is eleven and because Snape had been cleverly set up as > villain by the author. > > But with every book Harry's POV is widening and he is noticing more > and more things, so after OOP to me Harry is quite reliable. By the > same token, I don't think that "just because JKR does not want us to > trust Snape , does not mean that he is untrustworthy" is very strong > argument anymore. I want something stronger :o) and that brings us > to the second part of your post. Carol responds: Just a technicality here. Harry is not and never has been the narrator. He is not telling his own story in the first person like David Coperfield, Jane Eyre, or Huckleberry Finn. The (limited omniscient) narrator of the HP books narrator is just a voice who presents the action from a limited point of view, usually Harry's. This restricted point of view prevents us from seeing all the action or entering any other character's mind, except on those rare occasions when JKR allows her narrator to see from, say, Voldemort's or Vernon Dursley's or even Frank Bryce's POV. But Harry's POV is also that of a child or teenager with limited experience, especially in the early books, and definite preconceptions. So the narrator, who is *not* Harry, *is* frequently unreliable. If he weren't, we would have known from the outset that Crouch!Moody was a villain in GoF and that Sirius was not really a captive in the MoM in OoP. JKR *needs* an unreliable narrator. Our view of the other characters, and Snape in particular, *is* limited, and to some degree shaped and conditioned, by Harry's POV. We need to tread carefully, to watch actions as well as listen to words, to distrust what Harry *knows* if it involves another character's feelings or motivations. Even Dumbledore's reports of other people's actions and motivations, though more reliable than Harry's perceptions and preconceptions, are secondhand and incomplete. He provides a plausible explanation for Snape's actions in several cases, but it's only one of several reasons for the action (e.g., stopping the Occlumency lessons or using a counterspell against Quirrell!mort to keep him from killing Harry in SS/PS). DD doesn't lie about Snape, IMO, but he tells Harry only as much as he thinks he needs to know, or what he thinks he will believe, and not the whole truth. My only real points here are 1) Harry is not the narrator, 2) the narrator *is* and *must be* unreliable to sustain the element of mystery not only in each book but throughout the series, and 3) it *is* valid and in fact necessary to extend our observation of characters beyond what Harry sees, if necessary ignoring his interpretations and looking only at the words and actions as objectively presented. Snape turned pale, fine. That's objective reporting. Let the reader infer the reason for his pallor. Snape hated Harry? Not fine. That's Harry's assumption, reflected in the narrator's words, because the narrator is limited to his point of view. We can't assume the truth of that or any other assertion based on Harry's view of a conversation, action, event, or facial expression, just as we have to guard against taking what any character says as absolute fact. (How knowledgeable is the character? How likely to be telling the truth? And if the truth, is it the whole truth? Given all this, as well as the complexity of the time sequence (and if I dare says so, JKR's lack of attention to details that her careful readers notice), we really don't have sufficient information to judge Snape's actions in OoP. I believe, based on the details that DD has chosen to give Harry and, more important, DD's continuing trust in Snape, that Snape did go into the forest and that he did communicate instantly with DD using whatever means the Order members use to communicate with each other. But I don't *know* that. I simply trust DD's judgment of Snape over Harry's, as reflected not only in Harry's thoughts and words but in the narrative as presented through his point of view. Carol, noting that a single (or limited) point of view, even that of an intelligent and observant adult, is seldom wholly reliable From bboyminn at yahoo.com Mon Nov 1 23:42:36 2004 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Mon, 01 Nov 2004 23:42:36 -0000 Subject: Totally Obssessed - Found It! - Spinners End - Near BRISTOL! Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 116982 I found it, I found a street called Spinners End, and it's just south west of BRISTOL near Weston-Super-Mare. To find it on a map go to this first link which is a list of streets in the BS22 postal code. http://www.proviser.com/regional/postcodes/bs22/street_maps/alpha_s.html Then scroll down to - SPINNERS END (BS22 7HJ) OR (same link) http://www.multimap.com/map/browse.cgi?scale=10000&pc=bs227hj&title=Street+index+for+BS22+PROVISER&cat=loc and select the link. That will take you to www.MultiMaps.com and show you the close up location of the exact street. Now /Zoom/ back until you get a larger overview of the area. Zoom 1:2000000 (1:2,000,000) works good. So if Hagrid is flying from Spinners End to Surrey, he would have had to fly close to Bristol. Or, I could just be TOO obssessed and it could mean nothing. You be the judge. Steve/bboyminn (was bboy_mn) From anita_hillin at yahoo.com Mon Nov 1 23:49:08 2004 From: anita_hillin at yahoo.com (AnitaKH) Date: Mon, 1 Nov 2004 15:49:08 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: A Spinners [of Tales] End ........Spinners End by Mary Minton In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041101234908.68583.qmail@web42103.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 116983 LadyOfThePensieve wrote: Hi, I simply think this is a very interesting and crucial information. we already know JKR based Mrs Norris on the Mrs Norris in Austen?s Emma. So why shouldn?t she be inspired by a book she probably read: Spinners End? akh: I vote with the place-name folks. There would be copyright infringement issues, even if the book weren't in print, as long as it hasn't passed into public domain, which it sounds as though it hasn't. Spinners End has great potential for being Harry's escape from Privet Drive, whether it's the new OOP headquarters or just a refuge. OT, I've been trying to resist nit-picking your nice post,but I'm a RABID Jane Austen fan, and I am compelled to say that Mrs. Norris is Fanny Price's aunt in Mansfield Park. There! Now I can go back to being a quasi-normal person. akh, who is currently reading a biography of Jane Austen --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com/a [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From bob.oliver at cox.net Tue Nov 2 00:20:37 2004 From: bob.oliver at cox.net (lupinlore) Date: Tue, 02 Nov 2004 00:20:37 -0000 Subject: The intended murder of Pettigrew and moral corruption (Was; Vengeance on Sna In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 116984 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" wrote: > Carol responds: > Alla, just curious. How in your view would Sirius, an escaped convict, > and Remus, a werewolf, have proven that the man they murdered was > himself a murderer and a traitor? Would anyone, Fudge in particular, > have listened to them? Wouldn't Sirius have been sent straight to the > Dementors and Remus to Azkaban without a trial? > Well, I'm not Alla but I think I can answer this one. Remember, Peter was supposed to have been blasted into small pieces twelve years ago. The appearance of a freshly dead and intact body would have gone a long way to showing that there story had merit. Lupinlore From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Tue Nov 2 00:21:41 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Tue, 02 Nov 2004 00:21:41 -0000 Subject: Snape and the Pensieve (Was: Snape's stalling) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 116985 Pippin wrote: > It occurs to me that if Snape has access to Dumbledore's > pensieve, he could easily have found out quite a few things the > trio thinks he doesn't know about...like who set him on fire and > who raided his supply closet...oh, yes. I like it. ;-) Carol responds: Can you clarify your thinking here, Pippin? As far as I can see, the Pensieve is used either to study one's own memories (Dumbledore's normal use of it) or to temporarily protect certain memories from being accessed by an unfriendly person or enemy (Snape's use of it in OoP). the Pensieve doesn't appear to be used for longterm storage of memories; IOW, DD wouldn't leave his own memories in the Pensieve when he lent it to Snape. IIRC, the Pensieve is empty when Snape removes the three memories from his head and places them in it to prevent them from being accessed by Harry (and possibly by Voldemort). The Pensieve does not seem to be used for the study of *other people's* memories--except for the occasions when Harry is drawn inside it. Nor have we seen any evidence that even Dumbledore can draw memories from inside another person's head, which would be necessary if Snape were to study the Trio's thoughts via the Pensieve. Snape is a superb Occlumens and very astute at drawing conclusions (which doesn't prevent him from occasionally being seriously mistaken), but, Harry's perception that he can read minds to the contrary, AFAWK he can only perform Legilimency using a spell directly on the other person, as he does in the Occlumency lessons to simulate what Voldemort could do *without* such a spell. So exactly how might Snape discover the Trio's thoughts by using the Pensieve? Wouldn't he have known that someone other than Harry stole the polyjuice potion ingredients and the gillyweed if he could do so? Are you only talking about OoP since there's no indication of his borrowing the Pensieve before that book? Or am I misreading what you're saying here? Carol From bob.oliver at cox.net Tue Nov 2 00:23:25 2004 From: bob.oliver at cox.net (lupinlore) Date: Tue, 02 Nov 2004 00:23:25 -0000 Subject: The intended murder of Pettigrew and moral corruption (Was; Vengeance on Sna In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 116986 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" wrote: > Carol responds: > Alla, just curious. How in your view would Sirius, an escaped convict, > and Remus, a werewolf, have proven that the man they murdered was > himself a murderer and a traitor? Would anyone, Fudge in particular, > have listened to them? Wouldn't Sirius have been sent straight to the > Dementors and Remus to Azkaban without a trial? > Well, I'm not Alla but I think I can answer this one. Remember, Peter was supposed to have been blasted into small pieces twelve years ago. The appearance of a freshly dead and intact body would have gone a long way to showing that there story had merit. Lupinlore From mgrantwich at yahoo.com Tue Nov 2 00:46:12 2004 From: mgrantwich at yahoo.com (Magda Grantwich) Date: Mon, 1 Nov 2004 16:46:12 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: A Thought about the Secret Keeper Switch In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041102004612.37111.qmail@web53105.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 116987 > Pippin: > but maybe Sirius and James were expecting Voldemort to > come after Sirius another way. I think they expected that the spy > in the Order would try to trick Sirius into giving him the secret. > Sirius would pretend to fall for it, and when Voldemort attacked > the wrong place, it would prove who the spy was. Thoughts?< > The thing that gets me about the great SK-switcheroo is that even if Peter hadn't been a traitor, it wouldn't have worked. Let's pretend for a moment. Let's say Peter wasn't a spy and a traitor, that he stayed on the side of good but that his personality was the same. Sirius is the decoy, Peter is the SK and the Potters go into hiding. Voldemort comes looking for the Potters. He kidnaps people associated closely with James and Lily. Sirius holds up under torture and doesn't reveal anything. Ditto Lupin, who has the additional benefit of not knowing for sure anyway. Can we really see Peter holding up under torture? Voldemort might torture him just to find out Siruis' whereabouts but can't you see Peter spilling everything including the Secret? Magda __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com From dk59us at yahoo.com Tue Nov 2 00:48:08 2004 From: dk59us at yahoo.com (Eustace_Scrubb) Date: Tue, 02 Nov 2004 00:48:08 -0000 Subject: Detour (Was Re: Draco chapter) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 116988 > Eustace: > > So perhaps he does try to spring Lucius from Azkaban, but ends up > > doing something completely unrelated. Then again, nobody seems to > > think that Azkaban is going to be very difficult for the DEs to > > break out of--Draco's "assistance" might not be needed or even > > welcome. > > SSSusan: > It's interesting how quickly we've lost the idea that Azkaban is > difficult to get out of. It took Sirius 12 years to do it and he > was the *first*...but then those DEs broke out en masse, and I guess > that's what has made us think it can happen again easily. Voldy's > return & his alliance w/ the Dementors and all. Eustace_Scrubb: Good point! For me, the new sense on Azkaban is based on 1) Daily Prophet report that Fudge admits the Dementors are now answering to "Lord Thingy"; 2) Draco boasting to Harry that Lucius and the others would be out in no time; and perhaps most importantly, 3) Harry's willingness to go along with that assumption. Now, Draco and Harry may not be the world's best analysts of prison security...and maybe there _are_ other ways to keep wizards in jail (how long were the Dementors at Azkaban? only since the first war? What's the history of Azkaban anyway? Ooops, I'm about to go off on another rant--"Wizards who don't know their history are doomed to repeat it"--or something like that) Cheers, Eustace_Scrubb From mgrantwich at yahoo.com Tue Nov 2 00:59:59 2004 From: mgrantwich at yahoo.com (Magda Grantwich) Date: Mon, 1 Nov 2004 16:59:59 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: The intended murder of Pettigrew and moral corruption (Was; Vengeance on Sna In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041102005959.96629.qmail@web53101.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 116989 > Well, I'm not Alla but I think I can answer this one. Remember, > Peter was supposed to have been blasted into small pieces twelve > years ago. The appearance of a freshly dead and intact body would > have gone a long way to showing that there story had merit. > > Lupinlore Not really. What would Peter's newly dead body have proved? Only that instead of being killed 13 years earlier he'd managed to get away and had been in hiding ever since. Somehow Sirius found out he was still alive and got out of Azkaban to finish the job - the animagus explanation would suffice here, as Sirius would have recognized Peter from the newspaper photo. A live Peter Pettigrew would have been necessary to overturn the accepted version of the truth. Magda __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From foxmoth at qnet.com Tue Nov 2 01:41:49 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Tue, 02 Nov 2004 01:41:49 -0000 Subject: The intended murder of Pettigrew and moral corruption (Was; Vengeance on Sna In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 116990 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "lupinlore" wrote: > > Well, I'm not Alla but I think I can answer this one. Remember, > Peter was supposed to have been blasted into small pieces twelve years ago. The appearance of a freshly dead and intact body would have gone a long way to showing that there story had merit.< Pippin: Would it? Harry showed up with the freshly dead and intact body of Cedric Diggory, and the ministry still believed he was lying, even though Dumbledore backed him up and Diggory's parents believed him. Would Mama Pettigrew, assuming she's still with us, be content to have her son denounced as a traitor? Dumbledore might have been convinced, but we've already seen one dead body mistaken for another (Crouch Jr for Mrs. Barty Sr.) There's a good chance the ministry would have thought the corpse a phony created by Dark Magic and had Sirius kissed on the spot, as had already been ordained. Lupin would have been fortunate to escape the same fate. Pippin From nkafkafi at yahoo.com Tue Nov 2 01:50:09 2004 From: nkafkafi at yahoo.com (nkafkafi) Date: Tue, 02 Nov 2004 01:50:09 -0000 Subject: Unreliable narrator (Was: Snape's stalling) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 116991 > Carol responds: > So the narrator, who is *not* > Harry, *is* frequently unreliable. If he weren't, we would have known > from the outset that Crouch!Moody was a villain in GoF and that Sirius > was not really a captive in the MoM in OoP. JKR *needs* an unreliable > narrator. > > Our view of the other characters, and Snape in particular, *is* > limited, and to some degree shaped and conditioned, by Harry's POV. We > need to tread carefully, to watch actions as well as listen to words, > to distrust what Harry *knows* if it involves another character's > feelings or motivations. > > Given all this, as well as the complexity of the time sequence (and if > I dare says so, JKR's lack of attention to details that her careful > readers notice), we really don't have sufficient information to judge > Snape's actions in OoP. I believe, based on the details that DD has > chosen to give Harry and, more important, DD's continuing trust in > Snape, that Snape did go into the forest and that he did communicate > instantly with DD using whatever means the Order members use to > communicate with each other. Neri: My problem with the Snape fans is that the "subversive reading" (is this the term?) always seems to be in ONE direction. Somehow it is always to make Snape look better than what the way he comes out in the text, never worse. For example, in this post you first write that Harry's negative estimation of Snape is because of his limited and biased POV, and we need to distrust it. This is OK by me, but then you go on to disregard a huge time hole in the plot (which Harry doesn't notice!) as "JKR's lack of attention to details". Why? Because it casts the suspicion on Snape? The time hole in the plot is indeed huge. Even "JKR's lack of attention to details" can hardly hide it. According to quite detailed descriptions, Harry, Hermione and Umbridge go out to the forest at 8:00 PM the latest (canon: dinner time, well before sunset), and this is when Snape contacts the Order the first time. The breaking of the Order members into the DoM was at 1:00AM the earliest, probably later (depending on how much time you allocate to the battle before the first light of dawn, which Harry sees from DD's office at 3:00AM). This means that at least 5 hrs (but more likely 6) had passed between Snape contacting the Order the first time and the Order members entering the DoM. What happened during these hours? If everybody were so quick to act as DD implies, why did it take them 5 hrs? I would think that all the conspiracy theorists should pounce on this suspicious hole and analyze it to death, but for some reason there are no takers ;-). Is it just me, or is "subversive reading" really a code name for "get Snape to be the hero any way possible"? For detailed timeline and reasoning see: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/108037 Neri From foxmoth at qnet.com Tue Nov 2 01:52:00 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Tue, 02 Nov 2004 01:52:00 -0000 Subject: Snape and the Pensieve (Was: Snape's stalling) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 116992 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" wrote: > > Pippin wrote: > > > It occurs to me that if Snape has access to Dumbledore's > > pensieve, he could easily have found out quite a few things the trio thinks he doesn't know about...like who set him on fire and who raided his supply closet...oh, yes. I like it. ;-) > > Carol responds: > Can you clarify your thinking here, Pippin? As far as I can see, the Pensieve is used either to study one's own memories (Dumbledore's normal use of it) or to temporarily protect certain memories from being accessed by an unfriendly person or enemy (Snape's use of it in OoP). << Pippin: My idea is very simple. Suppose Snape is present during a suspicious incident, say the attack on Harry in PS/SS or Hermione's raid on the supply closet. He puts his memories in the Pensieve. He then enters the memory, as Dumbledore does in GoF and Snape himself did when he extracted Harry. Snape might then be able to experience his memory from any point of view he chooses, just as Harry did during his two pensieve visits. In this way, Snape might discover who jinxed the broom, and watch as Harry threw the firecracker and Hermione raided his supplies. This would also be an excellent way for Snape to report his espionage missions to Dumbledore. He simply sets his memories in the pensieve, and Dumbledore looks at them. Snape can then honestly report to Voldemort that he hasn't told Dumbledore a thing . Pippin From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Tue Nov 2 02:06:41 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Tue, 02 Nov 2004 02:06:41 -0000 Subject: THEORY: Unifying Occlumency Theory In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 116993 Alla wrote: > > I just had a thought. Since I share the view that Snape is spying in > the unconventional way, probably through Malfoy and therefore did > not return directly to Voldemort himself, do you think that Snape > can block the summoning as Occlumenc. Can Occlumency block the > connection through the Dark mark? Carol responds: Occlumency allows him to protect his own thoughts (or rather memories and emotions) from detection by others (notably Voldemort, which is why I don't accept Neri's theory that Voldemort taught Snape Occlumency). It wouldn't prevent him from receiving the summons when Voldemort touched Pettigrew's Dark Mark. In fact, it's clear that both he and Karkaroff felt the summons (Snape mentions how dark the mark had been earlier--I'm guessing that it burned like fire). Karkaroff fled in terror; Snape AFAWK *chose* to remain behind--one of those remarkable instances of courage that for me override anything he does as Potions Master. Occlumency blocks his own thoughts; it wouldn't block an incoming summons. Or that's how I read it. Carol, with apologies for not providing supporting quotes From annegirl11 at juno.com Tue Nov 2 02:14:14 2004 From: annegirl11 at juno.com (annegirl11 at juno.com) Date: Mon, 1 Nov 2004 21:14:14 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Harry, Hermione, Sirius, and the Dream, 2-way mirror Message-ID: <20041101.212030.1100.1.annegirl11@juno.com> No: HPFGUIDX 116994 Del said: > But the girls ?? Even if they didn't dare suggesting it to Harry, they > could have gone and talked to Snape themselves. Oh, I forgot that Luna was lurking around in that scene! No way in hell is Luna intimidated by Snape (I imagine she sees right through him). If necesary, Luna would would have marched into Snape's personal wherever-he-lives, ignored his protests and threats of bodily harm, and told Snape what was going on. But did Luna know Snape was in the order? Luna's creepily psychic, but I get the sense that the here-and-now oft eludes her. But Hermione still would have. If, at age 11, Neville was capable of tattling to DD, Hermione at 15 was capable of speaking to Snape. > As you say, it's frustrating. Very. > Personally, it's not so much the fact that he was lucky that > bothers me (luck is an indispensable part of a hero's equipment). Well, yeah, you've got a point there. Still, other heros at least use their wits a bit more, come up with clever solutions to difficult problems, use common household objects to build a bomb to bust open the door before the dynamite goes off, that sort of thing. Harry just sort of shows up for the crises and, through a series of coincidences, doesn't die. Honestly, the other heros in the club must think he's a poseur. > It's the fact that people who should know better keep depending so much on > his luck. *And don't arm him with any other training or information.* Ok, in OOtP, no one wanted Harry to be a hero. But the other books? If you want the kid to go into the Chamber, tell him he's a parselmouth! BEFORE anyone almost dies. &c. Aura ~*~ "You said I killed you - haunt me, then! The murdered do haunt their murderers, I believe. Be with me always - take any form - drive me mad! Only do not leave me in this abyss, where I cannot find you!" --Wuthering Heights http://archive.skyehawke.com/authors.php?no=606 From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Tue Nov 2 02:25:09 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Tue, 02 Nov 2004 02:25:09 -0000 Subject: The intended murder of Pettigrew and moral corruption (Was; Vengeance on Sna In-Reply-To: <20041102005959.96629.qmail@web53101.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 116995 Magda: > A live Peter Pettigrew would have been necessary to overturn the > accepted version of the truth. Alla: Not necessarily. At the very least "the dead now" Peter pettigrew would have proved that long accepted version of the truth was incorrect and may have forced the Ministry to question Sirius with Veritaserum. From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Tue Nov 2 02:33:40 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Tue, 02 Nov 2004 02:33:40 -0000 Subject: Unreliable narrator (Was: Snape's stalling) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 116996 > Neri: > > My problem with the Snape fans is that the "subversive reading" (is > this the term?) always seems to be in ONE direction. Somehow it is > always to make Snape look better than what the way he comes out in the > text, never worse. For example, in this post you first write that > Harry's negative estimation of Snape is because of his limited and > biased POV, and we need to distrust it. This is OK by me, but then you > go on to disregard a huge time hole in the plot (which Harry doesn't > notice!) as "JKR's lack of attention to details". Why? Because it > casts the suspicion on Snape? Alla: Indeed, Neri. Well, I won't say that I have a problem with Snape fans, because truly, honestly I don't. :o) I like him too. :) But yes, I believe the question is very valid. Why we need to search the text for hidden meanings only when we need to make Snape look better, not worse? Inquiring minds want to know. :) If it only LOOKS LIKE Snape went to the forest, it is inferred that he did, but if Harry felt worse after lessons - it is inferred that Harry's feeling was irrational (Sorry, Carol and Pippin! Did not mean to single out your examples - just the first ones which came to mind). I can continue the list of examples. From foxmoth at qnet.com Tue Nov 2 02:37:02 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Tue, 02 Nov 2004 02:37:02 -0000 Subject: Unreliable narrator (Was: Snape's stalling) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 116997 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "nkafkafi" wrote: > > > Neri: > > My problem with the Snape fans is that the "subversive reading" (is this the term?) always seems to be in ONE direction. Somehow it is always to make Snape look better than what the way he comes out in the text, never worse.< LOL! I had the opposite impression...that anti-conspiracy theorists are always saying JKR didn't *mean* to make Lupin look bad . Personally, I believe I agreed with you on the time line but there are still quite a few reasons for why Snape couldn't have made contact with the order. Primarily, I am sure he believed Harry and his friends were safe enough in the forest--safer than they would be at the school, since Umbridge would have had them all expelled for breaking into her office and attacking the I-squad. Actually, unless JKR has gone and revised the text as she sometimes does, I can prove that the Harry POV 3rd person limited narrator is unreliable. JKR confirmed in chat that Lupin changes when the moon is up. http://www.quick-quote-quill.org/articles/2000/1000-scholastic-ch at.htm ***** Can you explain how Lupin turns into a werewolf, since he didn't turn in the Shrieking Shack in Prisoner of Azkaban, but instead he turned only when the full moonlight hit him outside the tunnel? If he only turned into a wolf in the moonlight, why didn't he just stay inside? Did it have to do with the potion? Or was the moon not up yet? The moon wasn't up when he entered the Shrieking Shack. ****** Evidently, the position of the clouds has nothing to do with it...but that's not what our narrator thinks... ----- A cloud shifted. There were suddenly dim shadows on the ground. Their party was bathed in moonlight. -- PoA ch 20. "Here comes Lupin!"said Harry as they saw another figure sprinting down the stone steps and haring toward the Willow. Harry looked up at the sky. Clouds were obscuring the moon completely. -- PoA ch 21 The moon slid out from behind its cloud. They saw the tiny figures across the grounds stop. Then they saw movement.-- "There goes Lupin," Hermione whispered. "He's transforming--" --PoA ch 21 ---- This has serious implications for Lupin theory. If he changes only when the moonlight hits him, as Harry seems to think, then he might have thought it was safe to return to the castle on a cloudy night. But apparently he had no justification for thinking so. Now, if anyone wants to refute all this by supposing authorial error, go ahead -- but in that case it's not the sole province of conspiracy theorists, is it? Pippin From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Tue Nov 2 02:42:03 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Tue, 02 Nov 2004 02:42:03 -0000 Subject: THEORY: Unifying Occlumency Theory In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 116998 Julie wrote: > > Here's an interesting question to consider: If Harry hadn't > > delved into Snape's private memories, how would the > > Occlumency lessons have eventually concluded? > > > Alla responded: > > Good question. Personally I think that Snape would have found one > reason or another to stop them. Carol notes: Quite possibly he had good reason to do so; either the lessons had served their purpose, telling Snape and Dumbledore what was happening in Harry's mind so that they more clearly understood the connection between Harry and Voldemort, or the lessons were growing dangerous, opening Harry's mind to Voldemort rather than closing it (in part because Harry wanted to find out what was behind the door and found reasons not to practice), or both. Snape may simply have realized that Occlumency was not the right solution since Voldemort's invasion of Harry's mind through the scar connection was not standard Legilimency and therefore could not be blocked through Occlumency. I think, though, that Harry could have blocked the dreams if he had tried; he just didn't want to, and Snape found that stubborn resistance extremely frustrating. I also think Snape realized that his efforts to persuade Harry to control his emotions and block the dreams were not only futile, they were making matters worse through Harry's resentment and active resistance, and he used his own very real anger at Harry for invading his privacy in the Pensieve as an excuse to end the lessons. He could hardly say, "Look, Potter. This isn't working out. Let's just stop these lessons, shall we? Our little secret from Dumbledore." No, he had to report the Pensieve incident to Dumbledore, who would agree that under the circumstances they should not be resumed. (As usual, DD presents only part of the story to Harry--Snape's inability to get past an old grudge. Convenient for him, acceptable to Harry.) It *seems* like an unfortunate incident, but I don't think it is. My feeling is that the lessons had to end in some way or Harry would have completed his dream and Voldemort would have found a way to lure him to the MoM. I'll be surprised if Occlumency comes up again in HBP, at least in relation to Harry. I do hope we see it again in relation to Snape. Carol From garybec101 at comcast.net Tue Nov 2 02:59:58 2004 From: garybec101 at comcast.net (garybec) Date: Tue, 02 Nov 2004 02:59:58 -0000 Subject: Felix Felicis In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 116999 (snip to all) Becki responds; I agree with those who think that Felix Felicis will be the new DADA teacher. More ammunition for this is the double letter, *FF*, not unlike many other teachers at Hogwarts: Minerva McGonagall Severus Snape Quirenius Quirrell Filius Flitwick Poppy Pomfrey Becki (who was happy that Jo did not disappoint us and gave us some fresh discussion material as a nice Halloween present). From erinellii at yahoo.com Tue Nov 2 03:03:34 2004 From: erinellii at yahoo.com (Erin) Date: Tue, 02 Nov 2004 03:03:34 -0000 Subject: Prefects taking points solved-- NOT!!!! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117000 "khinterberg" > wrote: > > > > Everyone always points to the discussion between Ernie Macmillan > and Draco about prefects taking points as a mistake on JKR's part. > > However, in my new US paperback edition, it's not a problem at all: > > > > "You can't take points from fellow prefects, Malfoy." > > > > Was this always there, or is it a new addition to the story to > clear up the problem? Erin: It's a new addition-- but still doesn't solve the problem! What about Fred and George shoving the slytherin prefect into the cabinet? They still have no reason to do that, or notice anything new, as they aren't prefects themselves! The only thing that would have made sense was to have said prefects couldn't take points from houses other than their own... --Erin From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Tue Nov 2 03:10:16 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Tue, 02 Nov 2004 03:10:16 -0000 Subject: The intended murder of Pettigrew and moral corruption (Was; Vengeance on Sna In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117001 Magda Grantwich wrote: > > >if they had killed Peter, Sirius would never have any proof that he was innocent. > Eggplant replied: > > without Peter's help Voldemort would never have been able to rise again and he would have remained an insubstantial specter, a danger only to rats and snakes in the forests of Albania. This is why stopping Sirius and Lupin from killing Wormtail was the biggest mistake in Harry's entire life. > > barmaid responded: > > While it is my first inclination to agree that a dead Peter at this > point in the story could have *prevented* a Voldy-back-in-a-body from happening -- this really is a flawed way of thinking. All a dead > Peter in the Shrieking Shack would do is change something about how > Voldy gets a body. Always dangerous to think that if you (or anyone) had just done one thing different the world would be good and safe and happy today. Carol adds: And like it or not, Voldemort *must* acquire a body in order for Harry to defeat him and fulfill the Prophecy. If LV remained in the wilderness, "a danger only to rats and snakes" until Harry died a natural death, the only person who could destroy him would be gone and he could start from scratch--a new Quirrell, a new body through some other form of Dark Magic, immortality assured because he would *not* have Harry's blood in his veins. But I agree with barmaid; Voldemort would have found a way to come back, perhaps through Barty Jr. He would not have remained a spirit in the wilderness for long. And now that he has one, he can be annihilated forever in Book 7. Carol From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Tue Nov 2 03:17:14 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Tue, 02 Nov 2004 03:17:14 -0000 Subject: The intended murder of Pettigrew and moral corruption (Was; Vengeance on Sna In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117002 > Carol adds: > And like it or not, Voldemort *must* acquire a body in order for Harry > to defeat him and fulfill the Prophecy. Alla: I don't , Carol :o) I don't like it at all. I would like for Harry to be able to worry about other things than the fate of the whole WW. I also have quite a few reservations such as that Dumbledore could have misinterpreted the prophecy. Carol. > But I agree with barmaid; Voldemort would have found a way to come > back, perhaps through Barty Jr. He would not have remained a spirit in > the wilderness for long. And now that he has one, he can be > annihilated forever in Book 7. > Alla: Well, yes, of course. Voldemort would have found a way to come back, most likely. But the whole point of speculation "what would happen if Sirius and Remus killed Peter" was (at least IMO) to see how the story would turn out for the better for those three (Sirius, Remus and Harry), not for Dumbledore plans to get rid of Voldemort. :) From nkafkafi at yahoo.com Tue Nov 2 03:18:07 2004 From: nkafkafi at yahoo.com (nkafkafi) Date: Tue, 02 Nov 2004 03:18:07 -0000 Subject: Unreliable narrator (Was: Snape's stalling) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117003 > Pippin: > LOL! I had the opposite impression...that anti-conspiracy > theorists are always saying JKR didn't *mean* to make Lupin > look bad . Neri: Yes, the anti-conspiracy theorists are consistent. They claim that certain people are just obviously good, and Lupin is one of them. They don't employ "subversive reading" in the sense that the conspiracy theorists use it. If the conspiracy theorists are consistent, they should distrust anybody, including Snape. But for some reason he turns out to be the hero in any conspiracy theory I can remember. > Pippin: > Personally, I believe I agreed with you on the time > line but there are still quite a few reasons for why Snape couldn't > have made contact with the order. Primarily, I am sure he > believed Harry and his friends were safe enough in the > forest--safer than they would be at the school, since Umbridge > would have had them all expelled for breaking into her office and > attacking the I-squad. > Neri: Yes, your trust in Snape was quite admirable ;-) or at least it would have been admirable for an anti-conspiracy theorist. > Pippin: > Actually, unless JKR has gone and revised the text as she > sometimes does, I can prove that the Harry POV 3rd person > limited narrator is unreliable. Neri: A nice example, although IMO it is an example of a simple flint rather than an unreliable narrator. But I never doubted either flints nor the unreliable narrator. I just wondered how come they are always employed to prove that Snape is a great guy. Neri From dontask2much at yahoo.com Tue Nov 2 03:27:19 2004 From: dontask2much at yahoo.com (charme) Date: Mon, 1 Nov 2004 22:27:19 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: What were the corridor dreams ? References: Message-ID: <00c801c4c08b$dca451c0$6601a8c0@MITRE.ORG> No: HPFGUIDX 117004 ----- Original Message ----- From: "cubfanbudwoman" > > Del: >> > 3. They were real explorations of the DoM by LV in his body. >> > 4. The only other possibility I can think of, is that those >> > visions are real explorations of the DoM by LV *out of his body*. > > SSSusan: > 1) Voldy & the DEs were, indeed, after the prophecy; and 2) > Voldy was now aware of the mind-link. > > Kneasy: >> One possible answer is that Voldy can see through Harry's eyes, >> he knows what Harry's doing. He can affect Harry's behaviour, we >> know that (the urge to attack DD). But once you're in somebody's >> mind, not only can you rummage through memories, influence >> actions, you must know what they're doing - you're viewing it in >> real-time. He saw Harry coming. > Charme: Well, here's a slightly different thought: Snape may not have been that great a spy for the Order (if he is at all), because my interpretation of what Lucius insinuates in the DoM (OoP) is LV believed that Harry would have been chomping at the bit to find out more about the prophesy after having all those "visions." I don't think all this "mind linking" is as perfect for LV as he'd like it to be and I think the result is perhaps more indirectly subtle maneuvering than directly rummaging in Harry's head. Lucius' comments (and Bellatrix's too) in OoP lead me to believe that while LV could project to or thru Harry a bit, he couldn't get anything *from* Harry the same way or otherwise LV would have known, wouldn't he? IMO, LV was "waiting" for Harry's actions about the visions, not knowing when and where it would occur unless someone or something alerted him first. Furthermore, if one subscribes (which I don't - sorry) to the "Changeling Hypothesis" theory, when LV possessed Harry why didn't he recognize his own "soul" or "intellect" residing in Harry? charme From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Tue Nov 2 03:30:08 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Tue, 02 Nov 2004 03:30:08 -0000 Subject: Mind-linked!Snape (Part I: TBAY introduction) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117005 potioncat wrote: What is HUMBLE PIE? Can't find it in the data base or missed it in earlier post. > > > > Kneasy: > How Umbridge Modernises Badness/Light Enquiries, > Percy Is Potentially Evil Carol: Wouldn't that be HUMBLE PIPE? Carol, dodging flying pies and pipes as she apologizes humbly for the one-liner From templar1112002 at yahoo.com Tue Nov 2 03:34:41 2004 From: templar1112002 at yahoo.com (templar1112002) Date: Tue, 02 Nov 2004 03:34:41 -0000 Subject: Prefects taking points solved-- NOT!!!! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117006 > "khinterberg" > > wrote: > > > > > > Everyone always points to the discussion between Ernie Macmillan > > and Draco about prefects taking points as a mistake on JKR's part. > > > However, in my new US paperback edition, it's not a problem at > all: > > > > > > "You can't take points from fellow prefects, Malfoy." > > > > > > Was this always there, or is it a new addition to the story to > > clear up the problem? > > Erin: > It's a new addition-- but still doesn't solve the problem! > > What about Fred and George shoving the slytherin prefect into the > cabinet? They still have no reason to do that, or notice anything > new, as they aren't prefects themselves! > > The only thing that would have made sense was to have said prefects > couldn't take points from houses other than their own... > *****I don't understand what you mean, Erin. To me, it does solve the 'missunderstanding' very well. Fred and George are not Prefects but the Slytherin is one, he could have very well docked points from the twins, what's more, the Slytherin was a new IS member too, so he was entitled to dock points from anybody, according to the new decrees. And BTW, since when do Gred and Forge need a reason to do any mischief? lol Marcela From jlnbtr at yahoo.com Tue Nov 2 02:10:54 2004 From: jlnbtr at yahoo.com (Juli) Date: Mon, 1 Nov 2004 18:10:54 -0800 (PST) Subject: A Thought about the Secret Keeper Switch In-Reply-To: <20041102004612.37111.qmail@web53105.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041102021054.28890.qmail@web90101.mail.scd.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 117007 --- Magda Grantwich wrote: > The thing that gets me about the great SK-switcheroo is > that even if Peter hadn't been a traitor, it wouldn't > have worked. > > Let's say Peter wasn't a spy and a traitor, that he stayed > on the side of good but that his personality was the same. > > Sirius is the decoy, Peter is the SK and the Potters go > into hiding. Voldemort comes looking for the Potters. He > kidnaps people associated closely with James and Lily. > Sirius holds up under torture and doesn't reveal anything. > Ditto Lupin, who has the additional benefit of not knowing > for sure anyway. > > Can we really see Peter holding up under torture? Voldemort > might torture him just to find out Siruis' whereabouts but > can't you see Peter spilling everything including the Secret? The thing is I don't see Voldemort going after Peter at all, anyone would think: Peter? No way, he's too weak, too *stupid* and not strong. There's no possible way for LV to think even for a moment that little Peter was the SK, He would think first of Sirius, Lupin, Dumbledore, any auror, but Peter? Nope. So probably the switcheroo would have worked IF Peter wasn't a spy, he could have hidden (or stay close to DD for that matter) and the secret would be safe and so would be the Potters. JULI From kjones at telus.net Tue Nov 2 03:28:01 2004 From: kjones at telus.net (Kathryn Jones) Date: Mon, 01 Nov 2004 19:28:01 -0800 Subject: Snape and the Pensieve (Was: Snape's stalling) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4186FEC1.1040907@telus.net> No: HPFGUIDX 117008 > Carol wrote: > Snape is a superb Occlumens and very astute at drawing conclusions > (which doesn't prevent him from occasionally being seriously > mistaken), but, Harry's perception that he can read minds to the > contrary, AFAWK he can only perform Legilimency using a spell directly > on the other person, as he does in the Occlumency lessons to simulate > what Voldemort could do *without* such a spell. Kathy wrote: I think that Snape, being the epitome of the Slytherin personality, would not be so foolish as to demonstrate to Harry that he could perform Legilimency without a wand, particularly when Harry was obviously worried about it. In fact, any person capable of wandless magic would be unlikely to demonstrate it, especially Snape, especially in front of Harry. KJ From cleverestwitchofherage at yahoo.com Mon Nov 1 12:28:48 2004 From: cleverestwitchofherage at yahoo.com (cleverestwitchofherage) Date: Mon, 01 Nov 2004 12:28:48 -0000 Subject: Etymology of "Death Eater" (was Re: With enemies like these.....) In-Reply-To: <20041028124304.GB24579@prophecy.dyndns.org> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117009 > Alla: > > Thanks for the link and yes, Graveyeard scene did strike me as > > being symbolic. So, does it mean that if Voldie and his followers > > eat some part of "death" (which part I wonder?), did they expect > > to become immortal? > Christopher: > It's fully possible, I imagine, and I wouldn't be surprised if > that's the way things turn out. That does seem to be Voldemort's > ultimate goal, no? So why would his followers follow him and do as > he asks if he can't promise them the same thing? Hi, Pardon me if this point has been raised before, but I'm new to the list. Isn't one of the gods in Egyptian mythology known as the "eater of death"? Rowling makes numerous references to Egyptian wizards. Clever Witch From zacksmom3 at bellsouth.net Mon Nov 1 14:56:22 2004 From: zacksmom3 at bellsouth.net (glavgirl) Date: Mon, 01 Nov 2004 14:56:22 -0000 Subject: A Thought about the Secret Keeper Switch / Spy in the Order In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117010 Pippin wrote: > maybe Sirius and James were expecting Voldemort to come > after Sirius another way. I think they expected that the spy in > the Order would try to trick Sirius into giving him the secret. > Sirius would pretend to fall for it, and when Voldemort attacked > the wrong place, it would prove who the spy was. Thoughts? Pippin, I'm new to the group but thought I would put my two cents in on this. You have an interesting theory. It was interesting that the secret keeper switch was made at the last minute. If James and Sirius thought Voldemort would go after Sirius, then of course, Wormtail, would have free reign over the Potters. My question is, why not keep Sirius as the real secret keeper and play on Wormtail's lack of confindence? Give him the false info, like your theory. Voldemort would show up at a place filled with members of the Order ready to attack him. Zacksmom From chnc1024 at AOL.COM Tue Nov 2 04:10:52 2004 From: chnc1024 at AOL.COM (chnc1024 at AOL.COM) Date: Mon, 1 Nov 2004 23:10:52 EST Subject: Spinners End/Sirius Message-ID: <1ad.2a53e21f.2eb862cc@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 117011 As I was reading through the countless posts on Sirius, and Chapter 2 of H-BP, I began to wonder. IF Spinners End is indeed a place, then MAYBE its the place to where the Veil in the DoM leads. Calling it Spinners END (Imo) makes it sound like a rather dark place. Does anyone agree, or has my daughter just deprived me of so much sleep that I've finally lost my mind? Chancie~who is praying that her baby learns to sleep through the night SOON!!!! [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From eggplant9998 at yahoo.com Mon Nov 1 21:30:55 2004 From: eggplant9998 at yahoo.com (eggplant9998) Date: Mon, 01 Nov 2004 21:30:55 -0000 Subject: What should Harry REALLY feel sorry for? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117012 "Julia" wrote: > I think he had rights to do that, > even though didn't know how to > cast the spell. It's true that Harry's Crucio curse didn't have its full power, but it wasn't a complete failure either. It was good enough to earn Bellatrix Lestrange's respect and make her scream; before that she had nothing but contempt for Harry and spoke in mock baby-talk to him, after Harry's Crucio she stopped that nonsense. I'll wager that the very first time he cast the Crucio curse even Voldemort found it wasn't as powerful as it should have been. Like everything else practice makes perfect. I hope that is just the start of a new direction in Harry's life, in future books I hope to see Harry do something REALLY controversial, not just saying something rude to a friend and apologizing five minutes later, or being late returning a library book, or be fined for overtime parking. I want death and destruction, I want blood, I want gore! I want to see Harry kill some bad guys in a rather gruesome way and not feel one bit guilty about it. Please understand, I am not a monster, if Harry were a real person I would not want any of that, I would always want him to do the right, just, kind, moral thing; regardless of how boring it is. But Harry is a fictional character so I don't give a damn about right and wrong or any of that stuff, I just want him to do things that are interesting. Remember, Harry is now in a war, in a war good people have to do very bad things; and sometimes those good people even start to enjoy the killing. That's one of the things that makes war so horrible and I think it would be interesting to examine that unpleasant fact in fiction. Eggplant From jlnbtr at yahoo.com Mon Nov 1 20:07:39 2004 From: jlnbtr at yahoo.com (jlnbtr) Date: Mon, 01 Nov 2004 20:07:39 -0000 Subject: A Thought about the Secret Keeper Switch In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117013 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "pippin_999" wrote: > > We've been wondering how two such clever people as James > and Sirius would manage to come up with such a half-baked > idea--if Voldemort came after Sirius, as he expected, how could > Sirius be sure he wouldn't give away the switch under torture? > > Well, there's that old standby, the suicide pill -- but maybe Sirius > and James were expecting Voldemort to come after Sirius > another way. I think they expected that the spy in the Order would > try to trick Sirius into giving him the secret. Sirius would pretend > to fall for it, and when Voldemort attacked the wrong place, it > would prove who the spy was. Thoughts? My computer really hates me today, I had just written a reply to this post and when I was about to send it it just erased it, oh well I'll just write it again. I think the reason James chose Pettigrew as their Secret Keeper is that who in their right mind would ever think the idiot, no brains of Peter would be their secret keeper? MM says he was chubby and really not good at duels, if he was going to be tortured how long could he resist? not much. Voldemort as smart as he is would think that the secret keeper would be someone strong, like Sirius or maybe even Lupin. So why Peter? to make Voldemort go looking for Sirius (who was also going hidding), Peter would be safe and the Potters alive. And besides, they suspected Remus was the spy, so they were 4 marauders who trusted each other more than anything, one (Remus) was a *spy* so he's out of question, the second (Sirius) also in great danger, so who does this leave us with? Peter, the rat (in every meaning of the word). Even DD offered, so why did James refused? because he was trying to find out who really was tha spy, or to confirm it was Lupin. JULI From kelsey_dangelo at yahoo.com Tue Nov 2 00:42:19 2004 From: kelsey_dangelo at yahoo.com (Kelsey Dangelo) Date: Mon, 1 Nov 2004 16:42:19 -0800 (PST) Subject: What should Harry REALLY feel sorry for? In-Reply-To: <1099343891.224531.81902.m21@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <20041102004219.35558.qmail@web53105.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 117014 Julia: <> Kelsey: I can understand why Harry did what he did (an unforgivable curse on Bellatrix); heck, two years after I read that book, I still want to do it to the murderer of Sirius Black. If he didn't do something horribly reactionary, I'd think that he wasn't really bothered by Sirius' murder, or that he didn't have any moraldilemmass. But I still think that Harry should feel sorry for doing it. He's supposed to be good. He's supposed to "be above" revenge and using the Dark Arts. Harry, as a hero (an involuntary one), is put to higher moral standards. He's human, yes. He makes mistakes, yes. But he's got to feel sorry for it. He's got to learn his lesson, and that he can't lower himself to the level of a DE. And its not like killing or revenge is a smart move, anyway. The last time he wanted to commit revenge and kill someone with magic, he almost killed an innocent man (Sirius in POA). Kelsey, who believes that theUnforgivablee Curses are unforgivable, but one should ask for forgiveness and redemption. __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com From jlnbtr at yahoo.com Mon Nov 1 22:51:32 2004 From: jlnbtr at yahoo.com (Juli) Date: Mon, 1 Nov 2004 14:51:32 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Prefects taking points-an explanation? Message-ID: <20041101225132.27280.qmail@web90103.mail.scd.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 117015 Dungrollin: > > Goodness me! I bought a UK paperback of OotP the > other day, and it > says the same! Followed by: > 'I know *prefects* can't dock points from each > other,' sneered > Malfoy. Crabbe and Goyle sniggered. 'But members of > the > Inquisitorial Squad -' > > It's definitely new. My hardback's got the old: > 'It's only teachers who can dock points from houses, > Malfoy,' said > Ernie at once. > 'Yeah, we're prefects too, remember?' Snarled Ron. > 'I know *prefects* can't dock points, Weasel King,' > sneered Malfoy. > Crabbe and Goyle sniggered. 'But members of the > Inquisitorial Squad -' Now I understand why on her website JKR says Ron's got it all wrong when he, as a prefect took points from someone (I don't remeber who). In my edition it doesn't say it's only teachers who can take off points, just that prefects can't take points from each other. So, the Inquisitorial Squad takes points from everyone (inluding prefects), Prefects take points from students (non-prefect) and teachers take points from whoever they want, right? From chnc1024 at AOL.COM Tue Nov 2 04:16:25 2004 From: chnc1024 at AOL.COM (chnc1024 at AOL.COM) Date: Mon, 1 Nov 2004 23:16:25 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] A Thought about the Secret Keeper Switch Message-ID: <1dc.2ef63fa6.2eb86419@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 117016 In a message dated 11/1/2004 6:36:47 AM Pacific Standard Time, foxmoth at qnet.com writes: I think they expected that the spy in the Order would try to trick Sirius into giving him the secret. Sirius would pretend to fall for it, and when Voldemort attacked the wrong place, it would prove who the spy was. Thoughts? Pippin ************************************************************************* Chancie: I was wondering this too, but if that was the plan to weed out the spy, then why not use Dumbledore? Surely no one suspected him! As every one seems to know he's the only wizard Voldemort feared, then why not secretly make him secret keeper and follow the plan? chancie [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From kelsey_dangelo at yahoo.com Tue Nov 2 00:10:45 2004 From: kelsey_dangelo at yahoo.com (Kelsey Dangelo) Date: Mon, 1 Nov 2004 16:10:45 -0800 (PST) Subject: Why has DD never suggested Harry thank Snape? In-Reply-To: <1099293205.4133.80055.m5@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <20041102001045.69773.qmail@web53108.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 117017 Kelsey: Here's my humble and lame reasons why DD never suggested that Harry thank Snape. 1. A 'thank you', in order to be sincere, should never be suggested. Granted, a teacher should be the one to teach a student manners, so this doesn't really hold water. 2. DD knows that a 'thank you' from Harry Potter would only embarrass or hurt Snape's pride. Yeah, yeah, Snape tells Harry that he should be thanking him on bended knee in the Shrieking Shack, but maybe that's just an act he's putting on in front of Sirius Black and Remus Lupin (i.e. he wants the recognition from other people, not Harry). Snape certainly doesn't ever mention saving Harry's life again. He doesn't seem too proud of it, doesn't really seem to like that he had to do it. Maybe DD knows that BIG SECRET of Snape's (why he's on the good side) and that a 'thank you' from Harry would be salt in an open wound. Long and short of it: it seems to be that maybe DD knows that Snape doesn't want to be thanked, and particularly from Harry. I guess I never really thought about the significance of the fact that Harry never thanked Snape for saving his life because the awkwardness of such a scene is too terrible to think of. If Harry had said 'thank you', what would Snape have done? What would he have said? I'm sure that Snape would have certainly felt better about Harry (who would have humbled himself and shown that he wasn't his father). Then that would have ruined their whole antagonistic relationship! Kelsey, who doesn't presume to understand the ways of Severus Snape. From kelsey_dangelo at yahoo.com Tue Nov 2 00:14:18 2004 From: kelsey_dangelo at yahoo.com (Kelsey Dangelo) Date: Mon, 1 Nov 2004 16:14:18 -0800 (PST) Subject: "Goody Two Shoes" Re: Dirty Harry/Clean Harry In-Reply-To: <1099293205.4133.80055.m5@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <20041102001418.30499.qmail@web53105.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 117018 Geoff: > I think your definition is where the problem lies. I don't know whether you are a contributor from the US but, in UK terms, "goody two shoes" is normally used as a derogatory term of description. It is someone who is too "squeaky clean", too "nice" to be true, if you get my drift. If I was told I was a "goody two shoes", I think I would be quite irritated and annoyed. << Kelsey: :) I guess I'm to blame for using the term 'goody-two-shoes', and I'll stop. I am U.S. born and linguistically raised. And I have been called a 'goody-two-shoes' on more occasions than I'd care to count. But it's always been in a teasing-joking-friendly way from my friends and I was using the term as a teasing-joking-friendly way for Harry to explain how his moral core is so very good (almost to the point of absurdity) in the face of evil, temptation, adolescent hormones, a brain connection to the dark lord, and tons of homework. I felt that Harry was such a 'goody two shoes' (i.e. more than Hermione or Percy) that he constantly forgoes the annoying procedure of rules to do what is ultimately good. What word or term could be used to explain someone who's <<'got a good heart and always seeks the altruistic action'>> [love that quote, SSSusan, it's exactly what I want to say!]? I don't think the word 'good' is right. It's vague and not strong enough. Kelsey, who's settling for the term 'ultra, possibly-unrealistically good moral core'. From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Tue Nov 2 04:26:25 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Tue, 02 Nov 2004 04:26:25 -0000 Subject: Re [HPforGrownups] Umbridge was:(Umbridge,Quidditch, and the Wizarding World In-Reply-To: <20041025165211.99726.qmail@web90107.mail.scd.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117019 Juli wrote: > > I've never actually thought about it... But the MoM is > having some serious problems, probably Umbridge will > soon be fired (for sadist detentions, etc.), so what > could she possibly do for DD? I don't think DD saved > her from the centaurs just to ger a life-debt, he's > just a nice guy and would never intentionally kill > anyone (thinking about the LV vs DD fight in MoM). Or > maybe he thinks she'll play some future roll. Carol responds: Do we actually have canon evidence that Dumbledore saved her? Maybe Snape did it--unwillingly but knowing it was his duty. Assuming that he did go into the forest (and I haven't seen any compelling evidence that he didn't act on his intention), wouldn't he have encountered the Centaurs? And how would he have known that Harry, Hermione and friends had actually left the forest and headed for the MoM if the Centaurs didn't tell him about the Thestrals? How Snape would have convinced them to cooperate without using magic against them and being captured himself, I have no idea. Alternate scenarios, anyone? Carol, picturing Snape wafting Umbridge out of the forest on a conjured stretcher, grumbling about Potter all the way From foxmoth at qnet.com Tue Nov 2 04:28:51 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Tue, 02 Nov 2004 04:28:51 -0000 Subject: Unreliable narrator (Was: Snape's stalling) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117020 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "nkafkafi" wrote: > > > Pippin: > > LOL! I had the opposite impression...that anti-conspiracy > > theorists are always saying JKR didn't *mean* to make Lupin > > look bad . > > Neri: > Yes, the anti-conspiracy theorists are consistent. They claim that certain people are just obviously good, and Lupin is one of them. They don't employ "subversive reading" in the sense that the conspiracy theorists use it. If the conspiracy theorists are consistent, they should distrust anybody, including Snape. But for some reason he turns out to be the hero in any conspiracy theory I can remember. > Pippin: I'm not following you here...if a reader points out something in the text that makes Lupin worse than he appears to Harry, that's subversive, because Lupin is just obviously good, and anything that makes him appear not as good must be a flint. But if a reader points out something that makes Snape worse than he appears to Harry, that's not subversive because??? Harry is angry because he thinks Snape didn't take him seriously in front of Umbridge. He then finds out that Snape actually contacted the Order twice -- once on Sirius's behalf and once on Harry's own. He does not challenge this information or ask why it took Snape so long to contact the order for the second time, so assuming that this is significant and not a flint is a subversive reading, right? Pippin From kelsey_dangelo at yahoo.com Tue Nov 2 00:18:51 2004 From: kelsey_dangelo at yahoo.com (Kelsey Dangelo) Date: Mon, 1 Nov 2004 16:18:51 -0800 (PST) Subject: Harry's 'Goodness' (was Re: Dirty Harry/Clean Harry) In-Reply-To: <1099293205.4133.80055.m5@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <20041102001851.57176.qmail@web53106.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 117021 Del: "I don't know. Look at many of the kids : Ron, Hermione, Neville, Ginny, Luna, and some others. They don't seem to have a strong dark side either." Kelsey replies: I think that the cutting difference between Harry's goodness and the goodness of the other characters (particularly his peers) is that Harry's goodness is called into question too often (tested and tempted during the plot). Harry is the hero of the book, the center, and the good polar opposite of Voldemort. And considering that, he seems 'more good' because he is forced to act of it so often. Also, he does things that are out-of-the-ordinary good. Like telling Cedric about the dragons, whereas the other champions (who are certainly morally good, but are average) didn't even consider it. Kelsey From dontask2much at yahoo.com Tue Nov 2 04:34:40 2004 From: dontask2much at yahoo.com (charme) Date: Mon, 1 Nov 2004 23:34:40 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Etymology of "Death Eater" (was Re: With enemies like these.....) References: Message-ID: <00f001c4c095$456eb5c0$6601a8c0@MITRE.ORG> No: HPFGUIDX 117022 ----- Original Message ----- From: "cleverestwitchofherage" Hi, > > Pardon me if this point has been raised before, but I'm new to the > list. Isn't one of the gods in Egyptian mythology known as > the "eater of death"? Rowling makes numerous references to Egyptian > wizards. > > Clever Witch > Charme: Welcome, Clever Witch :) Yes, there is.....Ammut was considered a demoness in ancient Egyptian religious culture. She was known as the 'Eater of Hearts', 'The Devourer' and 'Great of Death' because she was a demoness of punishment, which its way could be who you are thinking of. It is said the The Book of the Dead, Ammut sat at the judgement ready to devour the souls of the unworthy - considered the final death for an Egyptian. Hope this helps :) charme From erinellii at yahoo.com Tue Nov 2 04:42:01 2004 From: erinellii at yahoo.com (Erin) Date: Tue, 02 Nov 2004 04:42:01 -0000 Subject: Prefects taking points solved-- NOT!!!! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117023 > Marcela wrote: > *****I don't understand what you mean, Erin. To me, it does solve > the 'missunderstanding' very well. > > Fred and George are not Prefects but the Slytherin is one, he could > have very well docked points from the twins, what's more, the > Slytherin was a new IS member too, so he was entitled to dock points > from anybody, according to the new decrees. And BTW, since when do > Gred and Forge need a reason to do any mischief? lol Erin: But, the problem is much more widespread than that. Immediately after the Inquisitional Squad is given the power to dock points (according to the change, it's to dock points from other prefects) the Giant Hourglasses of the other three houses decline dramatically in jewels. Well, other prefects simply can't affect it all that much. Harry, for instance, is not a prefect. If Malfoy has had the power all along to dock points from anyone who is not a prefect, why hasn't he taken a zillion points from Harry already? They just got it totally wrong, IMO. --Erin From kelsey_dangelo at yahoo.com Tue Nov 2 00:16:17 2004 From: kelsey_dangelo at yahoo.com (Kelsey Dangelo) Date: Mon, 1 Nov 2004 16:16:17 -0800 (PST) Subject: Good moral core (Re: Dirty Harry/Clean Harry) In-Reply-To: <1099293205.4133.80055.m5@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <20041102001617.95930.qmail@web53109.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 117024 Del : Lying : he does it pretty often. He might sometimes feel a bit remorseful about it at the moment he does it, but it usually doesn't prevent him from sleeping soundly. Cheating : he copies Hermione's homework. In my book, that's cheating. And he has no remorse about it. Stealing : I do remember that he helped and supported Hermione when she stole the ingredients for the Polyjuice potion from Snape's office. He had no remorse about it. Kelsey: Ok, here we go into the Kantian vs. Utilitarian definition of moral goodness. The crimes you listed above are victimless crimes, IMO. He doesn't target people or even hurt people at large (except when he can't see into the future the consequences of his actions). In other words, he has the best of intentions. Why does Harry help steal ingredients? To try to save the school from the Heir of Slytherin. Why does Harry copy homework? Because he's concerned and worried about greater issues in the WW rather than Divination homework. Why does he lie? Because he doesn't want to disappoint people (and he does feel guilty about it, and I think it causes him usually to rectify the issue). Or he lies to protect himself when he was doing something for the greater good (i.e. lying to Umbridge). So, when it comes to the 'little' things, Harry's follows a more Utilitarian system of morals (doing what it takes for the greater good). The reason he's so stressed and does them is because he is so concerned about the bigger issues in the world. Yes, Harry fantasizes cursing people (Snape). But who doesn't think once in a while (particularly when they're very angry) about killing or hurting someone. It's different than acting on those feelings. I also think that Harry's opinion of Snape is evolving. For instance, this fantasy occurs before he learns that Snape is a former Death Eater and a trusted member of the Order. But, where it comes to the big things, Harry is Kantian in his belief that there are things that you don't do (particularly when they hurt someone). He never (except with Bellatrix) attacks anyone without being attacked first. He never (even though he suffers much abuse from the Muggle world) attacks, hurts, or defames Muggles as a whole. He doesn't steal, cheat people, or lie to hurt people or increase his own ambitions. There are times when Harry falters and has a 'learn his lesson' moment. For instance, when he selfishly goes to Hogsmeade and breaks the rules and receives a talking-to from Lupin. This is part of an 'evolving Harry', but his core, if anything, becomes more good as he goes along. Even when Harry has these "learn his lesson" moments, they seem pretty harsh for a teenager, but it's because he's a hero, and so much is demanded of him, he almost has to act more good and more moral than other people because of his role as hero. I still think that Harry's going to have to destroy Voldemort, but he's going to feel really horrible about it. And I don't see him waging a war and executing DEs. I don't see him becoming an anti-hero (a dark, villainous character that happens to be on the side of good). He's just not Barty Crouch, Sr. Kelsey, who is suddenly grateful for her painful semester in Philosophy 101 PS. I recently read something I wrote in a journal a few months ago about the parallels between Voldemort and Harry (their connection and similarities in situations, their connection to 'Slytherin traits'). I saw how much Harry is 'ambiguous' in some ways as a hero because he is so connected to his polar opposite (his nemesis Voldemort). But I think that this also comes back to choice and moral cores. Although Harry is a lot like Voldemort, he's still got that ultra-good core that determines his choices and actions. From khinterberg at yahoo.com Tue Nov 2 04:46:45 2004 From: khinterberg at yahoo.com (khinterberg) Date: Tue, 02 Nov 2004 04:46:45 -0000 Subject: Prefects taking points solved-- NOT!!!! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117025 > Erin: > But, the problem is much more widespread than that. Immediately > after the Inquisitional Squad is given the power to dock points > (according to the change, it's to dock points from other prefects) > the Giant Hourglasses of the other three houses decline dramatically > in jewels. > Well, other prefects simply can't affect it all that much. Harry, > for instance, is not a prefect. If Malfoy has had the power all > along to dock points from anyone who is not a prefect, why hasn't he > taken a zillion points from Harry already? > > They just got it totally wrong, IMO. > > --Erin Erin, I believe we were suggesting that the Inquisitorial Squad members could take points from ANYONE, up to and including prefects. khinterberg From Erthena at aol.com Tue Nov 2 04:52:31 2004 From: Erthena at aol.com (werebearloony) Date: Tue, 02 Nov 2004 04:52:31 -0000 Subject: Felix Felicis (was : What we find there) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117026 > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "finwitch" > wrote: > > Felix Felicis... if not a person, it's a plant, an animal, a > spell, a > > magical phenomenon... > Nadine- > I don't know what or whom Felix Felicis(FF) will turn out to be but > I would like to analyze FF as a proposition for a spell. With strong > latin references like this, what else than a feel good spell Felix > Felicis could be ? Don't we already have the Cheering Spell though ? > The spell Hermione couldn't stop fussing about in PoA, remember ? I >Felis (generic for cat) is derived from the older > latin word Felix (meaning happy). Personally, I'd rather think that > JKR has used the former reference and created a new character by the > name of Felix Felicis Now loony: Here I come with the latin... I knew Felix= Lucky, happy, fruitful, auspicious, or well aimed, but I was completely stumped on felictis, so I asked my latin teacher and it means...Lucky, happy, fruitful, auspicious, or well aimed. So it's lucky lucky or "Lucky" (felix = nominative singular) felictis = either "of lucky" or "luckies (direct object)" Filectis is either Genitive singular or accusitive plural. I'm still not absolutely sure about which translation is correct, felictis could also be a variation on feliciter, luckily, but both words definately have luck (or one of the other translations) involved with them. That's waht is so lovely about latin, 20 maenings per word! I am, however, somehow reminded of dear old Ludo. Hope this helps, ~~loony From kelsey_dangelo at yahoo.com Tue Nov 2 00:12:32 2004 From: kelsey_dangelo at yahoo.com (Kelsey Dangelo) Date: Mon, 1 Nov 2004 16:12:32 -0800 (PST) Subject: Dirty Harry/Clean Harry In-Reply-To: <1099293205.4133.80055.m5@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <20041102001232.41512.qmail@web53107.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 117027 Del: >I know they had good intentions, but >this in itself does not excuse the theft Eggplant: >> Committing a very small crime in order to stop a vastly greater evil is not only justified it is smart. If Harry had not stolen the potions ingredients from Snape because he thought stealing was wrong in my book he would forever be branded as a terminally boring Goody Two Shoes. Nobody wants to read about the further adventures of Mr. Dudley Do-right. In future books I hope to see Harry do something REALLY controversial, not just saying something rude to a friend or being late returning a library book. I want to see Harry spill some (bad guys) blood and not feel particularly guilty about it. Remember, Harry is now in a war. A war where good people don't sometimes have to do very bad things is impossible; and sometimes those good people even start to enjoy the killing. I think that's one of the things that makes war so horrible. << Kelsey: I'm laughing because we're back with the 'Goody two shoes' terminology!! [my personal opinion is that 'goody two shoes' can be used to describe someone's moral core, not just their actions, i.e. a goody two shoes can break the rules, but that was a different post]. In fact, Eggplant, your whole post brings us back to the original debate, 'will Harry become 'Dirty Harry' and do morally not-right things for the greater good?' debate. Thank you. I personally think that Harry is very interesting _because_ he is so good and won't cross that moral line (killing people) in order to do what's right. That's maybe the main crutch of the next two books in Harry's moral dilemma. Obviously, he might have to kill Voldemort as his destiny, but I think he's going to be very messed up because of it. And I do make a difference between breaking a small 'rule' or moral code (i.e. stealing potions from a large store in order to track a murderer) and a bigger moral code (i.e. killing someone). The first doesn't really hurt anyone and the second does. The first was because there really wasn't any other option; the second makes him just as bad as his enemy. There are lots of 'normal' and 'human' characters that are realistically breaking rules and being not perfect. But I think Harry is interesting because he shows us that someone who cares not a lot for rules, who is so 'normal' and 'human' and 'realistic', can have such a sound and strong moral core. Kelsey, who hopes she's not being redundant. From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Tue Nov 2 05:00:25 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Tue, 02 Nov 2004 05:00:25 -0000 Subject: Dirty Harry/Clean Harry In-Reply-To: <20041102001232.41512.qmail@web53107.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117028 >> Kelsey: > I personally think that Harry is very interesting > _because_ he is so good and won't cross that moral > line (killing people) in order to do what's right. > That's maybe the main crutch of the next two books > in Harry's moral dilemma. Obviously, he might have > to kill Voldemort as his destiny, but I think he's > going to be very messed up because of it. Alla: Personally, I am of the opinion that harry won't kill Voldemort in a conventional way, but with the power 'Dark Lord knows not" (Love or something like it ;)) Yes, I don't see Harry being happy if he simply kills Voldie. Too bad. :) From erinellii at yahoo.com Tue Nov 2 05:10:12 2004 From: erinellii at yahoo.com (Erin) Date: Tue, 02 Nov 2004 05:10:12 -0000 Subject: Prefects taking points solved-- NOT!!!! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117029 > Erin, > I believe we were suggesting that the Inquisitorial Squad members > could take points from ANYONE, up to and including prefects. > > khinterberg Erin: But that is not what the change makes it sound like. Here are the new quotes, American PB pgs 625-626. *********************** "Afraid I'm going to have to dock a few points fron Gryffindor and Hufflepuff," he drawled. "You can't take points from fellow prefects, Malfoy," said Ernie at once. "I know *prefects* can't dock points from each other," sneered Malfoy; Crabbe and Goyle sniggered. "But members of the Inquisitorial Squad--" ************************* See what I mean? Before the change, it sounded as though the prefects couldn't take points from anyone, which clashed with Book 2 evidence. Now it sounds as though prefects have been able to take points from regular students all along; the only thing at issue is whether or not Malfoy can take points from fellow prefects. --Erin From apeiron at comcast.net Tue Nov 2 05:14:28 2004 From: apeiron at comcast.net (Christopher Nehren) Date: Tue, 2 Nov 2004 00:14:28 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Etymology of "Death Eater" (was Re: With enemies like these.....) In-Reply-To: References: <20041028124304.GB24579@prophecy.dyndns.org> Message-ID: <20041102051428.GA25009@prophecy.dyndns.org> No: HPFGUIDX 117030 On Mon, Nov 01, 2004 at 07:28:48 EST, Clever Witch scribbled these curious markings: > Pardon me if this point has been raised before, but I'm new to the > list. Well, in that case, greetings and salutations, and welcome! > Isn't one of the gods in Egyptian mythology known as the "eater of > death"? Rowling makes numerous references to Egyptian wizards. I can't find any topical reference to that phrase or any web site containing permutations of that phrase. The closest that I can find is Ammut: "Eater of Hearts", "Great of Death" (none of my dictionaries present a sensible interpretation of the word "Great" in this phrase; anyone know what it could mean?) as cited at http://www.thekeep.org/~kunoichi/kunoichi/themestream/ammut.html . Can you perhaps elaborate with any details about this Egyptian deity? Christopher -- I abhor a system designed for the "user", if that word is a coded pejorative meaning "stupid and unsophisticated". -- Ken Thompson - Unix is user friendly. However, it isn't idiot friendly. From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Tue Nov 2 05:30:59 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Tue, 02 Nov 2004 05:30:59 -0000 Subject: How can you kill a wizard? (Was: Hagrid) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117031 I (Carol) wrote: > > > And it does seem that magical beasts, notably the snake that bit Mr. Weasley (a Voldemort-possessed Nagini?) are capable of > killing wizards, as are dragons (alas for Charlie?), manticores, and > others. They can have their souls sucked by Dementors, a fate quite > literally worse than death. But I don't think those creatures will > play a role in the final battle. I think it will be wizard against > wizard, the DEs using the Unforgiveable Curses when they can, though > it seems difficult to use them in the heat of battle.< > > >What other possibilities might there be? Can a wizard drown? (Harry > thinks he can during Task 2 of the TWT.) Evidently wizards can be > blasted into pieces (Benjy Fenwick; the supposed death of Peter > Pettigrew).< > > >I must appear very bloody-minded in this post, but I'm really not. > I'm just trying to figure out 1) how JKR can present a battle scene > that's more exciting and perilous than the DoM battle (AKs from every side will be boring and monotonous; "stupefy" and similar curses seem like inadequate weapons), and 2) how the good guys can kill the bad guys without resorting to the evil weapons of the enemy (the Dark > Arts are not taught at Hogwarts). > > >Any other ideas? < > > Kim added: > > One question (to Carol), is why you think the dementors won't > participate in the final battle? I thought they had proven a sort of loyalty to the dark side when the DEs escaped from Azkaban. But I > can see your point. I don't think Dementors would add much > excitement to the final battles, unless they were part of a whole > assortment of evil critters that are lending a hand to LV. Carol responds: I'm not sure why I don't envision a Tolkien-style battle with huge armies of wizards, trolls, goblins, Dementors, giants, and House Elves. Maybe it's because it's been done or it isn't JKR's style. Voldemort is nowhere near as powerful as Sauron and his skills as a general seem sadly lacking. I do think he'll try to use other creatures, probably as a means of accelerating the war in Book 6 without directly involving himself and his DEs, but that we'll see a more personal confrontation between DD and his followers on the one hand and LV and his followers on the other (the Battle or Hogwarts) at the end of Book 7, culminating in a personal battle of some sort between Voldemort and Harry (Harry stands over the fallen body of Dumbledore and strikes LV's head from his shoulders with the sword of Godric Gryffindor, and LV falls to the ground shapeless and empty. Oops. That's Eowyn and the Witchking of Angmar). . . . I could be wrong, but what would Dementors add to the battle, assuming that the students learn to cast a *real* Patronus and not just an imaginary one in DADA practice? But my real question is how the wizards will be able to kill each other without using AKs. I don't have the same moral qualms about having kids kill a Troll or a Giant, much less dispatch a Dementor, as I do about having them kill a fellow human being, even an evil one, especially using an Unforgiveable Curse, and the fact that eighteen-year-old Muggles kill other soldiers in wars and have done so for thousands of years doesn't make the idea any more acceptable to me. We're dealing with JKR's moral universe here and she has established the Unforgiveable Curses as evil. Surely these kids aren't going to fight evil with evil? Surely they aren't going to follow the Slytherin code of using any means to achieve their ends? Kim wrote: Will it be one big battle out on > the Scottish moors, or a series of smaller battles between good and > bad wizards, the final scene focusing on Harry defeating Voldemort? Carol: The second, I think. For one thing, if we added up the forces of good and evil, the entire student body of Hogwarts (minus about fifty Slytherins who have chosen to fight for Voldemort) plus the teachers and the Order amounts to about three hundred people (plus a hundred House Elves and maybe some merpeople and the Giant Squid). Voldie's forces, assuming he frees the imprisoned Death Eaters, consist of somwe thirty or forty DEs, a few traitors and Imperio'd people we have yet to meet, the Dementors, the giants, and possibly some goblins. JKR has yet to make a grand battle on the Scottish moors plausible (IMO). Just thinking out loud here in response to your question. I could be convinced otherwise by new plot twists in Book 6. (I forgot to mention that I do think dragons will come in somewhere--possibly burning down Muggle villages by night--and Charlie Weasley will come on stage for a shining moment before being the first Weasley to die.) > Kim wrote: > I had an idea previously (and am sure others have made similar > observations) that one way to defeat LV and the DEs would be somehow > to lure them into that special room in the Dept. of Mysteries, the > room that contains the greatest magic of all (love?), and that their > evil would then be "neutralized" in some fashion. It might be more > than LV could take and he might just vaporize, but it wouldn't be an > actual killing on the part of Harry and company. Of course that room may prove impossible to open, making that a moot point, but I still find the possibility really intriguing. Also there's the question of whether that most powerful magic resides only in that room or someplace else as well. Carol responds: Good. I like that better than having a lot of bloodshed as we'd have in a Muggle battle. Yes, people are going to die, but I imagine it won't be more than half a dozen good guys in Books 6 and 7 together and most of the baddies in Book 7. Or I can hope. > Kim wrote: > But, you've made a really good point, since it's imperative for the > good side to win the final battle, how are they going to do it if > they can't/won't kill anyone, even their evil enemies? Then again, > are good wizards/witches allowed just to injure their enemies? If > they can only immobilize them somehow, not necessarily kill them, > maybe it would still be possible to defeat them. In that sense, I > mean immobilize them, tie them up, take them away, etc., if possible, not to allow them to recover and get up to keep fighting. But even that seems a bit boring. Another far-fetched possibility is that the DEs will turn on each other and on LV for some reason and will do themselves in in the end. Carol responds: Thanks. I get a bit discouraged when people are more interested in my sign-offs than my points! But, yes, that's my big question. If we get down to a battle between wizard and wizard, will it just be the DEs throwing AKs with an occasional Crucio for their sadistic pleasure, or will it be the DoM all over again (with a bit more organization and discipline), with "Stupefy!" being the favorite curse? Surely that's not all there is? And how can there be a final battle unless most of the DEs are actually killed? And, to return to my original question, how do you kill a magical person who can survive splinching or burning at the stake? Would the spell that blew up twelve Muggles really kill a wizard? (Can you imagine Hermione blowing up Bellatrix as the DEs blew up Benjy Fenwick?) We're back to Dark Creatures, unknown spells, and possibly Godric Gryffindor's sword. Or sweeping the DEs off their feet with a mighty wind and blowing them into the lake, where they'll find justice at the hands of the merpeople and the arms of the Giant Squid--if they don't drown first. Carol, sounding facetious but actually finding this subject very painful to deal with From nkafkafi at yahoo.com Tue Nov 2 06:02:30 2004 From: nkafkafi at yahoo.com (nkafkafi) Date: Tue, 02 Nov 2004 06:02:30 -0000 Subject: Unreliable narrator (Was: Snape's stalling) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117032 > Pippin: > I'm not following you here...if a reader points out something in > the text that makes Lupin worse than he appears to Harry, that's > subversive, because Lupin is just obviously good, and anything > that makes him appear not as good must be a flint. But if a > reader points out something that makes Snape worse than he > appears to Harry, that's not subversive because??? > > Harry is angry because he thinks Snape didn't take him seriously > in front of Umbridge. He then finds out that Snape actually > contacted the Order twice -- once on Sirius's behalf and once on > Harry's own. He does not challenge this information or ask why > it took Snape so long to contact the order for the second time, so > assuming that this is significant and not a flint is a subversive > reading, right? Neri: I think the part that you don't follow is that I'm not talking about "a reader". I'm talking about particular kinds of readers. To use your terminology, I'm talking about the "conspiracy theorist" reader and the "anti-conspiracy theorist" reader. The "anti-conspiracy theorist" reader believes that distrust has its limits. There are some things in the text that are just plain true and you have to trust them. Some anti-conspiracy theorists (probably most of them, certainly myself) believe that Lupin is obviously a good person. Therefore anything that makes him appear not good has some explanation (usually not a flint. It could be a flaw or a mistake of Lupin that makes him more human, but not ESE). You can of course disagree with such a reader, but at least he is consistent. He does not claim to be what he is not. The "conspiracy theorist" reader, in contrast, claims to use "subversive reading" and distrust anything, especially things that appear to be certain. His/her motto is "things are not necessarily what they appear to be". For example, you have often justified ESE!Lupin by saying that he is presented as such a nice person and above any suspicion, therefore he must be the traitor. Now, since Snape usually appears to be a bad person, the conspiracy theorists saying that he is actually the hero seems like proper "subversive reading". But then we arrive at the end of OotP, and Snape appears at least as an OK guy. The great DD assures us Snape did everything he should have done to prevent the MoM battle. The narrator clearly tells us (I think you have recently quote this yourself) that Harry blames Snape only to relieve his own guilt. Superficially, Snape really appears to have done things right here. But then, a bit of subversive reading discovers a 5 hrs hole in the plot, which Harry DIDN'T notice, which makes OK-guy!Snape look very suspicious, and which DD appears to be covering but doesn't deny outright. What should a REAL conspiracy theorist do? He/she should immediately try to get to the bottom of this and find out who is the ESE here, or at least who is the puppet master, right? So how come all the conspiracy theorists either lose interest, or try to save Snape's honor by any means including assuming a flint? It seems that they are inconsistent in their own doctrine. One would suspect that they are actually more of Snape apologists than real conspiracy theorists. I hope I've managed to clarify my meaning. Neri From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Tue Nov 2 06:10:00 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Tue, 02 Nov 2004 06:10:00 -0000 Subject: Mind-linked!Snape (Part IV: TBAY conclusion) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117033 Neri wrote: > > > > Actually the correct words are "One who I believe has left me > forever. He will be killed, of course." The passive tense might be > important here. It might imply that Snape will be killed by an automatic control device (his dark mark?) rather than by Voldy or a DE squad. > Alla responded: > > I am also wondering about "of course" part. I mean yes, Voldie is a > big show - off, but could it be that he is indeed that confident that Dark Mark is guranteed kill - kill situation. Carol notes: If the Dark Mark automatically killed traitors to the DE cause, Snape would already be dead. Instead, he is "merely" burned when he hears Voldemort's name or is otherwise reminded of his disloyalty (Crouch!Moody in GoF). I agree that "of course" is yet another indication of Voldie's overconfidence and not a statement of fact. (Also, I think he would say something melodramatic like "He will die a slow, cruel death for daring to violate his oath" if death were the automatic consequence of disloyalty.) I don't think the passive voice is significant except that, like most bureaucrats and people of that ilk, Voldemort deliberately uses it to obscure his meaning--he doesn't say when or how or by whom the one he believes has left him will be killed (notice that he remains vague there as well, not wanting his DEs, or at least not all of them, to know the identity of the missing Death Eaters). There is, of course, the possibility that he has changed his mind about Snape and for whatever reason is now convinced of his loyalty, or that he's biding his time before ordering Snape's murder, which is neither his top priority nor particularly easy to accomplish with Snape spending so much time at Hogwarts. Perhaps he finds contact with Snape useful in some way (the double agent theory involving a Malfoy connection). And there's also a point I think is important, though no one else seems to: Voldemort is not a prophet, and just because he says that the renegade DE (presumably Snape) will die doesn't mean that he really will. That's only what Voldemort wants and believes at that point in the series. If he now suspects Snape of helping the Order in the MoM debacle, he may be back to the "he will be killed" point of view. The problem, of course, is that with only some half dozen DEs left to him, that's going to be rather difficult to accomplish. Regarding Mind-Sharing!Snape (aka VASSAL), which I realize is a separate thread, I don't think Voldie would teach his DEs Occlumency, which would give them the ability to shield their emotions and memories from his view, much less Legilimency, which is the source of his power over them. It seems much more probable that Snape learned Occlumency from Dumbledore, building on a natural talent that DD perceived, as a means of self-protection when he first became a spy for Dumbledore. As others have pointed out, we have no solid evidence that Snape is a Legilimens as well as an Occlumens. He had to use a Legilimency spell on Harry. Carol, with apologies for combining two threads From snow15145 at yahoo.com Tue Nov 2 06:11:04 2004 From: snow15145 at yahoo.com (snow15145) Date: Tue, 02 Nov 2004 06:11:04 -0000 Subject: What were the corridor dreams ? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117034 Kneasy snipped: One possible answer is that Voldy can see through Harry's eyes, he knows what Harry's doing. He can affect Harry's behaviour, we know that (the urge to attack DD). But once you're in somebody's mind, not only can you rummage through memories, influence actions, you must know what they're doing - you're viewing it in real-time. He saw Harry coming. Kneasy pinched not snipped: Harry's had a visitor. Has he gone yet? Snow: I suppose you could look at this way, but I really don't think that possession of the mind was involved, at least not from outside interference, at this point. IMO The part of Riddle/Voldemort that had lied dormant inside Harry since the attack at Godric's Hollow, that grew greater and more powerful with Harry's age and knowledge and had peaked at the bodily return of its counterpart; Voldemort, can often be seen by Dumbledore inside Harry. In COS Dumbledore sees the same exact traits that he had previously seen in Riddle when he asked each of them "Is there anything you want to tell me". Harry harbors an unknown visitor; that part of Riddle/Voldemort inside Harry that can be seen only by the superior legilemence Dumbledore. In COS again, Dumbledore had told Harry that Riddle unwillingly transferred powers to him but I think, no I'm sure, he neglected to tell Harry that that was not all that Voldemort had transferred. The snake part of Harry that wanted to attack Dumbledore was the part of Riddle/Voldemort that had been transferred to Harry (that's why there is a significant connection between Voldemort's emotions and Harry's harbored visitor) `not' Voldemort possessing Harry's vision. Dumbledore in OOP said to Harry that Voldemort imagined himself, in his own mind, to be in the Ministry and therefore that is what Harry had seen. The Lost Prophesy U.S. pg. 829 "Professor Snape discovered, Dumbledore resumed, "that you had been dreaming about the door to the Department of Mysteries for months. Voldemort, of course, had been obsessed with the possibility of hearing the prophecy ever since he regained his body, and as he dwelled on the door, so did you, though you did not know what it meant. This statement from Dumbledore that Voldemort dwelled on the door so therefore so did Harry is why I feel that Voldemort does not have anymore than a projection to give Harry's mind, if Voldemort thinks or dwells on a subject so does Harry. Voldemort did not enter Harry and make Harry see the Ministry, Voldemort dwelled on the Ministry to such extent that Harry could see where Voldemort's thoughts were. Hermione had reiterated a similar response initially when Harry first told her of what he had seen when Sirius was supposedly held captive at the Ministry. Harry and Hermione fought over the fact that it was or wasn't just a dream as it turned out it was just a fabricated dream that was, as Dumbledore had put it, something Voldemort had dwelled on...so did Harry. Harry is becoming more acute to his inner, if you will, Voldemort side or presence but his mother's presence is also present. In real life it is representative of feeling pulled in either direction. The voice from within that saves the soul, so to speak. Harry has been cursed and counter-cursed with his mother's protection and Riddle/Voldemort's uncalculated invasion. Snow From gbannister10 at aol.com Tue Nov 2 07:59:17 2004 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Tue, 02 Nov 2004 07:59:17 -0000 Subject: Totally Obssessed - Found It! - Spinners End - Near BRISTOL! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117035 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Steve" wrote: Steve/bboyminn: > So if Hagrid is flying from Spinners End to Surrey, he would have had > to fly close to Bristol. > > Or, I could just be TOO obssessed and it could mean nothing. > > You be the judge. Geoff: I don't quite follow what you're trying to say here. I assume that you are referring to Hagrid bringing Harry from Godric's Hollow to Privet Drive at the beginning of PS. What connection has this flight got to do with Spinner's End? If he were flying from the Spinner's End which you have found in Worle, which is, as you say, on the north side of W-s-M, the most direct line to Little Whinging (if we accept the view that it is in the bit of Surrey north of the river) would take you over Bath south of Bristol. If Little Whinging is more into "traditional" Surrey he would fly even further south. But Hagrid comments that he flew "over" Bristol. (PS "The Boy Who Lived" p.16 UK edition). But, as I have said, I don't see the Spinners End connection. Other folk have also indicated Spinners End in Sandwell as a possibility - especially with the Dudley connection. Geoff http://www.aspectsofexmoor.com From finwitch at yahoo.com Tue Nov 2 08:21:52 2004 From: finwitch at yahoo.com (finwitch) Date: Tue, 02 Nov 2004 08:21:52 -0000 Subject: Felix Felicis/initials... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117036 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "garybec" wrote: > > > > (snip to all) > > Becki responds; > > I agree with those who think that Felix Felicis will be the new DADA > teacher. More ammunition for this is the double letter, *FF*, not > unlike many other teachers at Hogwarts: > > Minerva McGonagall > Severus Snape > Quirenius Quirrell > Filius Flitwick > Poppy Pomfrey Finwitch: I thought of this, too. And QQ was one DADA teacher who DID hold the post longer than a year. So I assume FF will be one, now. I wonder, though: Sybilla Trelawney, Rubeus Hagrid (HAVE been sort of fired already, for a time anyway) but what of Sprout? Vector? Sinistra? Of course, Albus Dumbledore also puts this to question (but AD *has* been forced to leave Hogwarts as it is...) hmm-mm. Or Irma Pince, (IP) or Argus Filch(AF)? But as we're in initials, how about RH - which *could* go for Royal Highness - further putting Rubeus Hagrid as the Half Blood Prince? Oh, and Barty Crouch - BC. Can't have both BC and AD, can we? Completely different era, right? AM (Alastor Moody) - well, a bit of an *earlier* matter... IP is very familiar... AF? can anyone come up where that could go with? Hmm-mm... HP HG (Chemical mark for quick-silver/mercury! And um - measure your blood-pressure with HGMM as unit) RW (Rewind?) NL (NetherLands for Neville?) Finwitch From bboyminn at yahoo.com Tue Nov 2 08:48:52 2004 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Tue, 02 Nov 2004 08:48:52 -0000 Subject: Totally Obssessed - Found It! - Spinners End - Near BRISTOL! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117037 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Geoff Bannister" wrote: > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Steve" wrote: > > Steve/bboyminn: > > So if Hagrid is flying from Spinners End to Surrey, he would have > > had to fly close to Bristol. > > > > Or, I could just be TOO obssessed and it could mean nothing. > > > > You be the judge. > Geoff: > I don't quite follow what you're trying to say here. > > I assume that you are referring to Hagrid bringing Harry from > Godric's Hollow to Privet Drive .... > > If he were flying from the Spinner's End which you have found in > Worle, which is, as you say, on the north side of W-s-M, the most > direct line to Little Whinging ... would take you over Bath south > of Bristol. > > Geoff bboyminn: A quick look at the map shows me that between Spinners End and Bath is the Bristol International Airport. Maybe Hagrid flew a little farther north to avoid the airport. So, yes, I am making a connnection between Hagrid's flight with Harry that passed somewhere near Bristol to Surrey the night they drop Harry at the Dusleys. For Spinners End to be an Industrial Park that happens to be vaguely near Dursley, does mean much in the story, but tying Spinners End to Bristol DOES have potential to be relavant to the story. In reality, I think JKR may have stumbled across the name, and just liked the way is sounded. As I said in one of my previous posts on this subjects, authors are always on the look out for good sounding names. (I've taken two of my character surnames from cigarette brands; Chesterfield and Dunhill.) That means that, while we may fantasize many possibilities, in the end there is probably no functional connection between the name and the real world. That said, I'm still betting it's a place name. Of course, there could be a fun endearing new character in the next book called Theodopholus Spindrew, affectionately known to his friends as 'Spinner' who will serves as cannon fodder. Although, I doubt it. It was just a thought. Steve/bboyminn (was bboy_mn) From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Tue Nov 2 10:38:01 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Tue, 02 Nov 2004 10:38:01 -0000 Subject: Harry's 'Goodness' (was Re: Dirty Harry/Clean Harry) In-Reply-To: <20041102001851.57176.qmail@web53106.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117038 Kelsey wrote : "I think that the cutting difference between Harry's goodness and the goodness of the other characters (particularly his peers) is that Harry's goodness is called into question too often (tested and tempted during the plot). Harry is the hero of the book, the center, and the good polar opposite of Voldemort. And considering that, he seems 'more good' because he is forced to act of it so often." Del replies : Makes sense. However, my original comment wasn't about Harry's good side, but about his dark side. It is quite obvious that Harry is forced to choose the right much more often than the other characters. But it is not so obvious in my opinion that his dark side is that much weaker than that of other characters. Kelsey wrote : "Also, he does things that are out-of-the-ordinary good. Like telling Cedric about the dragons, whereas the other champions (who are certainly morally good, but are average) didn't even consider it." Del replies : Pure speculation. I'm not saying that Harry never does out-of-the-ordinary good things, because he does, but this is a bad example. Del From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Tue Nov 2 10:46:04 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Tue, 02 Nov 2004 10:46:04 -0000 Subject: Good moral core (Re: Dirty Harry/Clean Harry) In-Reply-To: <20041102001617.95930.qmail@web53109.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117039 Kelsey Dangelo wrote: " PS. I recently read something I wrote in a journal a few months ago about the parallels between Voldemort and Harry (their connection and similarities in situations, their connection to 'Slytherin traits'). I saw how much Harry is 'ambiguous' in some ways as a hero because he is so connected to his polar opposite (his nemesis Voldemort). But I think that this also comes back to choice and moral cores. Although Harry is a lot like Voldemort, he's still got that ultra-good core that determines his choices and actions." Del replies : This to me begs the question : WHY ? Why does Harry have this ultra-good core and not LV ? Were they born that way or did they acquire their cores while growing-up ? I'm not sure there's an answer, I'm just wondering. Del From gbannister10 at aol.com Tue Nov 2 11:03:15 2004 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Tue, 02 Nov 2004 11:03:15 -0000 Subject: Totally Obssessed - Found It! - Spinners End - Near BRISTOL! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117040 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Steve" wrote: > > bboyminn: > So, yes, I am making a connnection between Hagrid's flight with Harry > that passed somewhere near Bristol to Surrey the night they drop > Harry at the Dusleys. > Geoff: If Hagrid was trying to avoid built-up areas, he would have swung south to avoid BIA (which in 1981 would have not created too many problems at night). But that still begs my question - why are you equating Spinners End with Godric's Hollow which was Hagrid's route in 1981? Is there evidence that they are (1) the same place or (2) near each other? I thought Spinners End had just come out of the woodwork as one of the newly-revealed chapter titles.... Geoff http://www.aspectsofexmoor.com From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com Tue Nov 2 11:12:46 2004 From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (arrowsmithbt) Date: Tue, 02 Nov 2004 11:12:46 -0000 Subject: Spinners End in Sandwell (near Birmingham) and Dudley (OT) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117041 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Geoff Bannister" wrote: > > Geoff: > Sandwell was a name which appeared in the 1970s when a number of > administrative reorganisations took place and obscure names surfaced > for the new boroughs - Sandwell, Hyndburn, Thamesdown and Waveney > come to mind. It isn't near Birmingham, it's part of Birmingham. The > whole area is now administratively the West Midlands including Brum > (the nickname for Birmingham), Coventry, Walsall and Wolverhampton > inter alia. > > Kneasy: Tut, tut. It's got nothing at all to do with Birmingham and never has. I speak as someone who was born and bred there, though I've since moved on. All the old towns that make up the administrative abortion that is Sandwell (Oldbury, West Bromwich, Smethwick etc.) were even in a different county (Staffs) to Brum (Warks). It's not so little either, (population is in the hundreds of thousands), nor is it pretty, it's the old Black Country industrial region. I don't remember any Spinners End (though there was a Netherend). I suspect that it's all new development. Checking an old (1970s) A to Z against Spinners End entries on the web, there's no congruence - none of the current street names shown on the web can be found in that area on 30 year old street maps. It's probably named as a nod to the local 'heritage'. Any spinning done there would have been steel cables, not fabric. Some of the original names are evocative; Swan Village for example. But any swan found there was a pub. A real swan would have been paddling through industrial effluent on the local canal, coughing it's lungs out. Fortunately there's been a big clean up in the past 20 years. Sounds as if it was horrible, I know. Didn't seem so at the time; and whenever I chance to go back it still feels like slipping on an old pair of comfortable slippers. I'm home. From finwitch at yahoo.com Tue Nov 2 11:27:14 2004 From: finwitch at yahoo.com (finwitch) Date: Tue, 02 Nov 2004 11:27:14 -0000 Subject: What we find there- Places - real and imagined In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117042 > > Carol responds: > I think you're both right that Spinners End is not only a place but a > road. Doesn't "end" suggest a cul de sac, like Bag End in LOTR? I > don't think it's a real road, though--probably a fictional one like > Diagon Alley and Knockturn Alley, and possibly in that same > (imaginary) section of London. > > As for the name itself, "spinners" could be intended literally: people > (generally women) who spin thread from wool or other fibers, possibly > still done in some magical way in the WW, so Spinners End would be the > dead-end street where cloth is spun and perhaps woven (before going to > Madame Malkin and her competitors to be fashioned into robes). But > "spinners" could also suggest some mythical connotation: Clotho of the > Three Fates again? > > In any case, I think Steve is probably correct that a house in > Spinners End is the new Order headquarters, especially since it > appears so early in the book and we know Harry won't be spending much > time with the Dursleys. Finwitch: I took the link to see a ROAD named Spinners End near Bristol. Such a thing existing - well, probably nothing to do with HP, but still there - and Bristol WAS mentioned before... While I do think this IS a place, and propbably to do with spinners at spinning wheel, and that Harry will spend most of his summer there - I don't know if it has *anything* to do with the Order of the Phoenix. A place - a road - I suppose Harry will go there and stay, and that Godric's Hollow might be near it.. Still, why would it need to be HQ for the order? Why not a place where this half blood prince (who ever he is) lives? Or maybe Aberforth Dumbledore? Or - well, Tonks? Moody? Lupin? Longbottom? Hmm... Imagine Aberforth Dumbledore appearing at Dursleys, ready to take Harry away? Or Sirius, coming back as a phoenix? Finwitch From spotthedungbeetle at hotmail.com Tue Nov 2 11:55:07 2004 From: spotthedungbeetle at hotmail.com (dungrollin) Date: Tue, 02 Nov 2004 11:55:07 -0000 Subject: What were the corridor dreams ? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117043 Del: So finally I reach my real question : what were those dreams ??? Here are some ideas I've had. 1. They were real dreams that LV was having every night. 2. They were dreams LV was deliberately implanting in Harry's mind. 3. They were real explorations of the DoM by LV in his body. 4. The only other possibility I can think of, is that those visions are real explorations of the DoM by LV *out of his body*. Dungrollin: I have a couple of questions to add... Firstly: Why is it during the Occlumency lesson when Harry's being Legilimensed by Snape that (in the vision) he finally gets through the door into the DoM? The previous time that he sees the corridor in an Occlumency lesson (the first lesson), it's actually the *memory* of being there with Mr. Weasley, it's not a vision. Harry's expecting to go towards the door, but they turn off towards the courtroom, and he recognises it for the first time. But in the lesson in which he gets *through* the door, it can't be a memory that Snape's accessing, can it? Because Harry's never seen it before. Also: The two times that Harry feels the urge to attack DD are the only two times that they have any close contact in OotP before the grand finale. It's a bit odd that Voldy is there and waiting, both times, isn't it? Out of a whole school year in which Voldy could be in Harry's head, he's just happens to be there during the only two opportunities, (each lasting only a few seconds) in which Harry sees DD closely. Suggests something very permanent about the connection, to me. Furthermore: It could be that Harry just happens to be tuning into Voldyvision when Voldy's dreaming of the DoM (someone else pointed out that he really is very *very* obsessed with the prophecy, to the exclusion of almost all else). The connection between Harry and Voldy is at its strongest when Voldy's feeling strong emotion, and the fear of what the rest of that prophecy says, along with his deep desire to get hold of it could make those dreams the unsettling kind that you wake up from in a cold sweat. (If Voldy does anything as un-reptilian as sweating.) But if this is so, why doesn't Harry find himself down at the end of row ninety-seven staring longingly at the glass orb with his own name and that of the Dark Lord on it? He doesn't. He just gets to the right place, with a very strong feeling that there's something in here that he wants really really badly, but with no idea why. Voldy knows why, but Harry doesn't. Knowledge of facts is thus apparently not shared through the mind-link (at least not from Voldy to Harry), but the view out of the eyes, along with emotional states and desires, are; even if the objects of those desires are not explicit. Dungrollin Who'd love to spend the rest of the day thinking about this, but has to write a report by yesterday, and will anyway spend much of today berating herself for having been horribly lazy yesterday, so had better get on with writing it today... From mkeller01 at alltel.net Tue Nov 2 12:22:26 2004 From: mkeller01 at alltel.net (jksunflower2002) Date: Tue, 02 Nov 2004 12:22:26 -0000 Subject: Spinners End/Sirius In-Reply-To: <1ad.2a53e21f.2eb862cc@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117044 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, chnc1024 at A... wrote: > As I was reading through the countless posts on Sirius, and Chapter 2 of > H-BP, I began to wonder. IF Spinners End is indeed a place, then MAYBE its the > place to where the Veil in the DoM leads. Calling it Spinners END (Imo) makes > it sound like a rather dark place. Does anyone agree, or has my daughter just > deprived me of so much sleep that I've finally lost my mind? > > Chancie~who is praying that her baby learns to sleep through the night > SOON!!!! > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] Interesting..... Scenerio; Harry is attacked when leaving Privet Drive at the end of chapter one. Neither dead, nor alive he wonders through the veil for a quick visit with Sirius at Spinners End. Or, perhaps he floats around vapor-like for a while to observe Draco and his doings (chapter six.) Ah. My imagination is in overdrive. This is all great fun, isn't it? Toad (Who vividly remembers those sleepless nights when her twins were infants; hang in there, Chancie!!!) From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Tue Nov 2 12:41:14 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Tue, 02 Nov 2004 12:41:14 -0000 Subject: Harry's 'Goodness' (was Re: Dirty Harry/Clean Harry) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117045 > Kelsey wrote earlier: > "Also, he does things that are out-of-the-ordinary good. Like telling > Cedric about the dragons, whereas the other champions (who are > certainly morally good, but are average) didn't even consider it." > > Del replies : > Pure speculation. > I'm not saying that Harry never does out-of-the-ordinary good things, > because he does, but this is a bad example. > Alla: I think this is a very GOOD example. Yes, we don't know whether other champions CONSIDER telling Cedric about it, but we know that they DID not DO it. They all saw dragons and only Harry decided to help out his adversary. I would not say that this is an everyday thing From Zarleycat at aol.com Tue Nov 2 12:52:08 2004 From: Zarleycat at aol.com (kiricat2001) Date: Tue, 02 Nov 2004 12:52:08 -0000 Subject: A Thought about the Secret Keeper Switch In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117046 Pippin: > We've been wondering how two such clever people as James > and Sirius would manage to come up with such a half-baked > idea--if Voldemort came after Sirius, as he expected, how could > Sirius be sure he wouldn't give away the switch under torture? > > Well, there's that old standby, the suicide pill -- but maybe Sirius > and James were expecting Voldemort to come after Sirius > another way. I think they expected that the spy in the Order would > try to trick Sirius into giving him the secret. Sirius would pretend > to fall for it, and when Voldemort attacked the wrong place, it > would prove who the spy was. Thoughts? > Marianne: This theory makes me long for more detailed information regarding James and Sirius in their Hogwarts days. We've been told that they were both very intelligent and also great troublemakers. But we don't know anything about what sort of things they got up to, other than the glimpse of that atrocious scene with Snape and the long work to be come Animagi. Were these the type of kids who took what they learned and applied it in ways that that made their professors tear their hair out? Did they hatch elaborate schemes at school for their own amusement, which was worth paying a price of detention when caught simply because the escapade was so good or so much fun? If that's the case, and somehow it fits with the feeling I get about how these two operated together, then I can see them falling into the same pattern as young men in the way that they would plan something. It would make completely logical sense to the two of them (and evidently intelligent Lily also agreed to this). It would be a way to not only finger the spy, but also make the spy realize that the two bright boys had pulled off another one. Marianne From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Tue Nov 2 13:26:03 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Tue, 02 Nov 2004 13:26:03 -0000 Subject: Harry's 'Goodness' (was Re: Dirty Harry/Clean Harry) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117047 Alla wrote : "I think this is a very GOOD example. Yes, we don't know whether other champions CONSIDER telling Cedric about it, but we know that they DID not DO it. They all saw dragons and only Harry decided to help out his adversary." Del replies : How do we know that ? From what I remember, we only know that by the time Harry tells Cedric, the other champions haven't told him yet. We also know that Cedric feels grateful to Harry. But that doesn't preclude the possibility that the other champions told Cedric after Harry did. And by the way, the other champions did not SEE the dragons. Their trainers did. And we know that Harry felt an urge to tell Cedric because he was horrified by the VISION of the dragons. So one could argue that the other champions did not tell Cedric because they didn't realise how awful things really were. Speculation, I agree, but not more than the previous bits of speculation we've been discussing here. Del From jferer at yahoo.com Tue Nov 2 14:44:06 2004 From: jferer at yahoo.com (Jim Ferer) Date: Tue, 02 Nov 2004 14:44:06 -0000 Subject: Good moral core (Re: Dirty Harry/Clean Harry) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117048 Kelsey:"But I think that this also comes back to choice and moral cores. Although Harry is a lot like Voldemort, he's still got that ultra-good core that determines his choices and actions." Del:"This to me begs the question : WHY ? Why does Harry have this ultra-good core and not LV ? Were they born that way or did they acquire their cores while growing-up ? I'm not sure there's an answer, I'm just wondering." The difference is the capacity to love, to empathize, to see others as fellow humans. We know Harry loves and cares for others, and Voldemort loves or cares for no one, feels no bond with any human. He is a perfect sociopath. How did Harry get that way? We won't settle the nature/nurture argument here, but Harry at least had a year (important) with loving parents. The miracle is how he survived the Dursleys. Now he is in an environment with people he cares for deeply. Voldemort was brought up in an orphanage, and we don't know what that experience was like. On the "nature" side, we know that Voldemort's father was a b*****d, and that Harry's parents were loving of each other and of Harry. Actually, we aren't told anything about they treated Harry, but is there any reason to doubt their love? People who love don't hurt people for no reason. They might hurt, or even kill, particularly to defend the ones they love; but evil has a hard time taking over a heart with love in it. Jim Ferer From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Tue Nov 2 14:45:24 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Tue, 02 Nov 2004 14:45:24 -0000 Subject: Harry's 'Goodness' (was Re: Dirty Harry/Clean Harry) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117049 > Del replies : > How do we know that ? From what I remember, we only know that by the > time Harry tells Cedric, the other champions haven't told him yet. We > also know that Cedric feels grateful to Harry. > > But that doesn't preclude the possibility that the other champions > told Cedric after Harry did. Alla: How do we know that other champions did not tell Cedric? Considering the fact that canon is silent on that point (granted in itself "no evidence" is not necessarily an evidence to the contrary) and Cedric never once mentions it to Harry or anybody else, I think it is more than a pure speculation , but a reasonable assumption to make. Del: > And by the way, the other champions did not SEE the dragons. Their > trainers did. Alla: It is the same to me. Do you think that Madam Maxime did not describe it in all details to Fleur, for example? From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Tue Nov 2 14:54:58 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Tue, 02 Nov 2004 14:54:58 -0000 Subject: Good moral core (Re: Dirty Harry/Clean Harry) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117050 Jim: > How did Harry get that way? We won't settle the nature/nurture > argument here, but Harry at least had a year (important) with loving > parents. The miracle is how he survived the Dursleys. Now he is in an > environment with people he cares for deeply. Voldemort was brought up > in an orphanage, and we don't know what that experience was like. Alla: True, Jim. A year with loving parents is actually the only reason for Harry to remain "good" which makes sense to me. Otherwise, I just have to doubt the truth of JKR writing. I also love Rita Winston's theory that Lily left part of herself in Harry's head or heart, which supported him through all these years with Dursleys. From jferer at yahoo.com Tue Nov 2 14:58:29 2004 From: jferer at yahoo.com (Jim Ferer) Date: Tue, 02 Nov 2004 14:58:29 -0000 Subject: Harry's 'Goodness' (was Re: Dirty Harry/Clean Harry) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117051 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "delwynmarch" wrote: > > Alla wrote : > "I think this is a very GOOD example. Yes, we don't know whether other > champions CONSIDER telling Cedric about it, but we know that they DID > not DO it. They all saw dragons and only Harry decided to help out his > adversary." > > Del replies : > How do we know that ? From what I remember, we only know that by the > time Harry tells Cedric, the other champions haven't told him yet. We > also know that Cedric feels grateful to Harry. > > But that doesn't preclude the possibility that the other champions > told Cedric after Harry did. > It doesn't, but a judge would say we have to go with the record that's before us. Cedric certainly seems to give Harry the credit. Jim From gbannister10 at aol.com Tue Nov 2 15:00:47 2004 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Tue, 02 Nov 2004 15:00:47 -0000 Subject: Spinners End in Sandwell (near Birmingham) and Dudley (OT) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117052 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "arrowsmithbt" wrote: > > Kneasy: > Tut, tut. > It's got nothing at all to do with Birmingham and never has. > > I speak as someone who was born and bred there, though I've since > moved on. > All the old towns that make up the administrative abortion that is > Sandwell (Oldbury, West Bromwich, Smethwick etc.) were even in > a different county (Staffs) to Brum (Warks). Geoff: My apologies. I have a naughty tendency to mix up Birmingham with the West Midlands authority. You did once comment that you had worked in Brum - ambulances? I didn't realise you also hailed from the area. I used to teach in what was north-east Surrey and became Greater London - there are still mix ups there between "LCC" London and the expanded version. We had a whale of a time deciding on the name for the combined Wimbledon/Merton & Morden borough. All sorts of potty suggestions - not Spinners End or Godric's Hollow sadly; in the end we opted for a mundane Merton. From jferer at yahoo.com Tue Nov 2 15:01:45 2004 From: jferer at yahoo.com (Jim Ferer) Date: Tue, 02 Nov 2004 15:01:45 -0000 Subject: Good moral core (Re: Dirty Harry/Clean Harry) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117053 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "dumbledore11214" wrote: > > Jim: > > How did Harry get that way? We won't settle the nature/nurture > > argument here, but Harry at least had a year (important) with loving > > parents. The miracle is how he survived the Dursleys. Now he is in > an > > environment with people he cares for deeply. Voldemort was brought > up > > in an orphanage, and we don't know what that experience was like. > > > > Alla: > > True, Jim. A year with loving parents is actually the only reason for > Harry to remain "good" which makes sense to me. Otherwise, I just > have to doubt the truth of JKR writing. > I also love Rita Winston's theory that Lily left part of herself in > Harry's head or heart, which supported him through all these years > with Dursleys. I guess Catlady means Lily left some part of herself in Harry *magically." EVERY mother leaves HUGE parts of herself in her children. So do good fathers. That's why being a parent is sacred. Jim From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Tue Nov 2 15:02:13 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Tue, 02 Nov 2004 15:02:13 -0000 Subject: Harry's 'Goodness' (was Re: Dirty Harry/Clean Harry) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117054 Alla wrote : " How do we know that other champions did not tell Cedric? Considering the fact that canon is silent on that point (granted in itself "no evidence" is not necessarily an evidence to the contrary) and Cedric never once mentions it to Harry or anybody else, I think it is more than a pure speculation , but a reasonable assumption to make." Del replies with 3 questions : 1. Did Cedric mention to anyone that Harry told him about the dragons ? 2. Did Harry mention to anyone (except Ron and Hermione, but I don't even remember him telling *them*) that he told Cedric about the dragons ? (Moody overheard him, that's different). 3. If one of the other champions had indeed told Cedric after Harry, why would Cedric tell anyone ? In particular, why would he tell Harry ? I, Del, wrote earlier : "And by the way, the other champions did not SEE the dragons. Their trainers did. " Alla answered : "It is the same to me. Do you think that Madam Maxime did not describe it in all details to Fleur, for example?" Del replies : I'm sorry, but even the most vivid description is NOT AT ALL the same as seeing with your own eyes. Examples : - Ron knew that the TWT tasks would be dangerous. But it's only when he actually *saw* in what danger Harry was that he understood. - Harry is so special in the fight against LV because he's the only one who's actually *seen* him since he came back. He told the others about what he saw, but it's not at all the same. Del From mgrantwich at yahoo.com Tue Nov 2 15:08:45 2004 From: mgrantwich at yahoo.com (Magda Grantwich) Date: Tue, 2 Nov 2004 07:08:45 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: A Thought about the Secret Keeper Switch In-Reply-To: <20041102021054.28890.qmail@web90101.mail.scd.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041102150846.64678.qmail@web53108.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 117055 --- Juli wrote: > The thing is I don't see Voldemort going after Peter > at all, anyone would think: Peter? No way, he's too > weak, too *stupid* and not strong. There's no possible > way for LV to think even for a moment that little > Peter was the SK, He would think first of Sirius, > Lupin, Dumbledore, any auror, but Peter? Nope. So > probably the switcheroo would have worked IF Peter > wasn't a spy, he could have hidden (or stay close to > DD for that matter) and the secret would be safe and > so would be the Potters. Perhaps I wasn't clear. LV would go after Peter for information about the Potters' location and for information about Sirius' hiding place (because LV would assume Sirius was the SK). Since Sirius isn't protected by a Fidelius Charm, his whereabouts could be spoken about by others. Once he had Peter in his grip, LV would find out that in fact he'd hit the jackpot because it was Peter who was the SK after all! And since Peter was known to be one of the trio of pals that James Potter had all through school, I believe he would have been one of the first people LV and DE's would have gone after. The issue is: how much do we trust Peter to hold up under torture? Magda __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Tue Nov 2 15:10:52 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Tue, 02 Nov 2004 15:10:52 -0000 Subject: Harry's 'Goodness' (was Re: Dirty Harry/Clean Harry) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117056 Jim Ferer wrote : "It doesn't, but a judge would say we have to go with the record that's before us. Cedric certainly seems to give Harry the credit." Del replies : Agreed. But similarly I assume a judge would say that we can't conclude that the other champions never thought about telling Cedric. In fact, if we try to be fair, we should conclude from the books that : - Mme Maxime saw the dragons and told Fleur. But she most probably doesn't know that Harry and Karkaroff saw them too. So technically Fleur thinks she's got an advantage over all the other champions. - Karkaroff saw the dragons and most probably Mme Maxime. We can presume that he told both those things to Viktor. So Viktor thinks that both Harry and Cedric are at a disadvantage. - Harry is the only one who knows that only Cedric doesn't know about the dragons. Hence, we can't really compare Harry's action with the other champions' actions. Not all of them had all the cards in hand. Del From mgrantwich at yahoo.com Tue Nov 2 15:11:45 2004 From: mgrantwich at yahoo.com (Magda Grantwich) Date: Tue, 2 Nov 2004 07:11:45 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: The intended murder of Pettigrew and moral corruption (Was; Vengeance on Sna In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041102151145.6381.qmail@web53102.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 117057 >> Magda: >> >> A live Peter Pettigrew would have been necessary to overturn the >> accepted version of the truth. > > > Alla: > > Not necessarily. At the very least "the dead now" Peter pettigrew > would have proved that long accepted version of the truth was > incorrect and may have forced the Ministry to question Sirius with > Veritaserum. No it wouldn't. The MOM is far too attached to its preconceived notions - and besides, they'd still have Sirius pegged as the killer of a dozen muggles. What had to be proved was that Peter was capable of killing all those people and a dead Peter wasn't any good for that. Magda __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Tue Nov 2 15:16:17 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Tue, 02 Nov 2004 15:16:17 -0000 Subject: The intended murder of Pettigrew and moral corruption (Was; Vengeance on Sna In-Reply-To: <20041102151145.6381.qmail@web53102.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117058 Magda: > No it wouldn't. The MOM is far too attached to its preconceived > notions - and besides, they'd still have Sirius pegged as the killer > of a dozen muggles. What had to be proved was that Peter was capable > of killing all those people and a dead Peter wasn't any good for > that. Alla: But we don't know, right? Who knows, maybe one person in MoM decided to do his/her duty and try to question the story. What had to be proved also that Sirius did not do it and questioning him under Veritaserum would have done the trick, IMO. From jferer at yahoo.com Tue Nov 2 15:24:06 2004 From: jferer at yahoo.com (Jim Ferer) Date: Tue, 02 Nov 2004 15:24:06 -0000 Subject: Harry's 'Goodness' (was Re: Dirty Harry/Clean Harry) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117059 > Del: > In fact, if we try to be fair, we should conclude from the books that : > - Mme Maxime saw the dragons and told Fleur. But she most probably > doesn't know that Harry and Karkaroff saw them too. So technically > Fleur thinks she's got an advantage over all the other champions. > - Karkaroff saw the dragons and most probably Mme Maxime. We can > presume that he told both those things to Viktor. So Viktor thinks > that both Harry and Cedric are at a disadvantage. > - Harry is the only one who knows that only Cedric doesn't know about > the dragons. > > Hence, we can't really compare Harry's action with the other > champions' actions. Not all of them had all the cards in hand. You've a point there, but I'd guess that Mme. Maxime would believe that the other contestants might know, and Karkaroff, cynic that he would be, takes it for granted that the other contestants know. I think it's valid that you can't hold up this example alone as proof of Harry's sportsmanship, but we see other examples of it. He alwasy seems to focus on his own performance, not on bringing down the others. He competes but doesn't personalize it. They're all signs of the good character we're talking about. Taken that way, he's acting consistently with how we see him throughout the tournament. From gbannister10 at aol.com Tue Nov 2 15:24:21 2004 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Tue, 02 Nov 2004 15:24:21 -0000 Subject: Good moral core (Re: Dirty Harry/Clean Harry) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117060 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "delwynmarch" wrote: > > Kelsey Dangelo wrote: > " PS. I recently read something I wrote in a journal a few months ago > about the parallels between Voldemort and Harry (their connection and > similarities in situations, their connection to 'Slytherin traits'). I > saw how much Harry is 'ambiguous' in some ways as a hero because he is > so connected to his polar opposite (his nemesis Voldemort). But I > think that this also comes back to choice and moral cores. Although > Harry is a lot like Voldemort, he's still got that ultra-good core > that determines his choices and actions." Del: > This to me begs the question : WHY ? Why does Harry have this > ultra-good core and not LV ? Were they born that way or did they > acquire their cores while growing-up ? > > I'm not sure there's an answer, I'm just wondering. Geoff: I wonder this myself sometimes. After 30 plus years of teaching teenagers, I'm sure there seems to be something inherent which angles a person towards being good or otherwise. I'm not convinced that it's necessarily from parenting. I can recall pupils who always seemed to be bad - in temperament and behaviour who came from smashing family backgrounds and seems to behave that way form sheer perversity. Again, you would get a kid from a poor background - dysfunctional or abusive family members or who would be disadvantaged from a money point of view and they were pleasant and generous. But again, two people from similarly difficult backgrounds can react in totally opposite ways..... Take Harry as an example. He suddenly discovers that he has plenty of money and could easily want to keep it to himself but what happens? He buys stuff on the train and.... '"Go on, have a pasty," said Harry who had never had anything to share before or, indeed, anyone to share it with. It was a nice feeling.....' (PS The Journey from Platform Nine and Three Quarters" p.76 UK edition) And Tom? '!I decided to leave behind a diary, preserving my sixteen-year-old self in its pages so that one day, with luck,I would be able to lead another in my footsteps and finish Salazar Slytherin's noble work..."' (COS "The Heir of Slytherin" p.230 UK sdition) '"No, Harry, I fashioned myself a new name, a name I knew wizards everywhere would one day fear to speak when I had become the greatest sorcerer in the world"' (ibid. p.231) A lot of "I" there and the great things he wanted to do. Not much mention of generosity or wanting to share things with others although I suspect he'd not had things to share nor, indeed, anyone to share it with in the past. Geoff http://www.aspectsofexmoor.com From mgrantwich at yahoo.com Tue Nov 2 15:26:08 2004 From: mgrantwich at yahoo.com (Magda Grantwich) Date: Tue, 2 Nov 2004 07:26:08 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Unreliable narrator (Was: Snape's stalling) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041102152608.21963.qmail@web53104.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 117061 > Neri: > > My problem with the Snape fans is that the "subversive reading" > (is this the term?) always seems to be in ONE direction. Somehow it > is always to make Snape look better than what the way he comes out > in the text, never worse. On the contrary, we strive to make Snape look better than the way he comes out in too many readers' posts, namely as someone whose entire presence in the novels is just a combination of mean teacher/wanna-be toad poisoner who hates Harry because he hated James. All of which are at best superficial readings of one of JKR's greatest fictional inventions. If anything, we're subjecting the text to a close reading while stripping away the preconceived notions about Snape's character and motivations. Magda __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From nkafkafi at yahoo.com Tue Nov 2 15:41:02 2004 From: nkafkafi at yahoo.com (nkafkafi) Date: Tue, 02 Nov 2004 15:41:02 -0000 Subject: Good moral core (Re: Dirty Harry/Clean Harry) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117062 > Del:"This to me begs the question : WHY ? Why does Harry have this > ultra-good core and not LV ? Were they born that way or did they > acquire their cores while growing-up ? I'm not sure there's an > answer, I'm just wondering." > Jim Ferer: > How did Harry get that way? We won't settle the nature/nurture > argument here > Neri: The problem with both nature and nurture is that they discount the free will. LV would be able to excuse himself with "I'm bad because I have Slytherin's blood in me" (nature) or "I'm bad because I didn't have even a single year with loving parents" (nurture). But JKR's position seems to be that you are not allowed to excuse yourself with such reasons, good as they might be. Both LV and Harry have free will. LV is evil because he decided to be evil. Harry is good because he decided to be good. To ask for either nature or nurture reasons would be discounting their free will. From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Tue Nov 2 15:46:38 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Tue, 02 Nov 2004 15:46:38 -0000 Subject: Good moral core (Re: Dirty Harry/Clean Harry) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117063 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "nkafkafi" > Neri: > The problem with both nature and nurture is that they discount the > free will. SNIP. Both LV and Harry have free > will. LV is evil because he decided to be evil. Harry is good because > he decided to be good. To ask for either nature or nurture reasons > would be discounting their free will. Alla: I agree very much, BUT Harry was so very young,when his parents died, same with Tom Riddle when he was given to the orphanage. They must have had some examples, I don't know some REASONS to become good or evil. Am I being confusing? Free will is wonderful, but how can two year old or three year old decide something that big without outside examples or reasons? From finwitch at yahoo.com Tue Nov 2 15:54:35 2004 From: finwitch at yahoo.com (finwitch) Date: Tue, 02 Nov 2004 15:54:35 -0000 Subject: Harry's 'Goodness' (was Re: Dirty Harry/Clean Harry) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117064 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "delwynmarch" wrote: > > Del replies with 3 questions : > > 1. Did Cedric mention to anyone that Harry told him about the dragons ? > > 2. Did Harry mention to anyone (except Ron and Hermione, but I don't > even remember him telling *them*) that he told Cedric about the > dragons ? (Moody overheard him, that's different). > > 3. If one of the other champions had indeed told Cedric after Harry, > why would Cedric tell anyone ? In particular, why would he tell Harry ? Finwitch: We can assume that none of them told Cedric. Whereas Harry saw Madam Maxine (who'd have believed that Hagrid has a date and that he *invites* Harry to watch!!!) and Karkaroff - (who did NOT see Harry, being that he was under Invisibility Cloak)- so far as any of *them* knew, Harry had no idea (nor Cedric). So-- as none of them told *Harry*, I believe it's safe to assume that they didn't tell Cedric either. And for Cedric's part - did he believe Harry? He didn't do well in the task, now did he? Finwitch From foxmoth at qnet.com Tue Nov 2 15:55:50 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Tue, 02 Nov 2004 15:55:50 -0000 Subject: A Thought about the Secret Keeper Switch In-Reply-To: <20041102004612.37111.qmail@web53105.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117065 > > Pippin: > > but maybe Sirius and James were expecting Voldemort to come after Sirius another way. I think they expected that the spy in the Order would try to trick Sirius into giving him the secret. Sirius would pretend to fall for it, and when Voldemort attacked the wrong place, it would prove who the spy was. Thoughts?< Magda: > The thing that gets me about the great SK-switcheroo is that even ifPeter hadn't been a traitor, it wouldn't have worked. > Can we really see Peter holding up under torture? Voldemort might torture him just to find out Siruis' whereabouts but can't you see Peter spilling everything including the Secret? > Pippin: That's why I believe James and Sirius were thinking solely in terms of espionage. Voldemort *wasn't* grabbing known friends of Dumbledore off the street and torturing them to find out who the other members of the Order were. He wouldn't have needed a spy for that. I don't think it even occurred to James or Sirius that Voldemort, who favors cunning ruses and using others as his tools, would resort to brute force -- even after Peter is revealed as the true Secret-Keeper, Sirius discounts his plea that Voldemort bullied him into spying and giving the secret away. My belief is that James and Sirius expected Voldemort to use his spy to find out who the secret keeper was, and then use the spy, as someone the secret keeper trusted, to obtain the secret for him. Naturally if you expected Voldemort to use brute force to extract the secret, you would pick Dumbledore as the Secret-Keeper. But suppose the person James and Sirius suspected as the spy was someone whom Dumbledore would never think to doubt. Would they not fear that if Dumbledore were the Secret-Keeper, this person might hoodwink Dumbledore into giving the Potters away? Suppose that the Mad-eye Moody switch had not been discovered at the end of GoF...in that case Fake!Moody could have taken the paper with the secret of Grimmauld Place written on it to Voldemort, revealed the secret, and then shown the paper to Harry, without Dumbledore ever realizing the secret had been breached. Pippin From jferer at yahoo.com Tue Nov 2 16:12:29 2004 From: jferer at yahoo.com (Jim Ferer) Date: Tue, 02 Nov 2004 16:12:29 -0000 Subject: Good moral core (Re: Dirty Harry/Clean Harry) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117066 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "nkafkafi" wrote: > > > Del:"This to me begs the question : WHY ? Why does Harry have this > > ultra-good core and not LV ? Were they born that way or did they > > acquire their cores while growing-up ? I'm not sure there's an > > answer, I'm just wondering." > > > Jim Ferer: > > How did Harry get that way? We won't settle the nature/nurture > > argument here > > > > Neri: > The problem with both nature and nurture is that they discount the > free will. LV would be able to excuse himself with "I'm bad because I > have Slytherin's blood in me" (nature) or "I'm bad because I didn't > have even a single year with loving parents" (nurture). But JKR's > position seems to be that you are not allowed to excuse yourself with > such reasons, good as they might be. Both LV and Harry have free > will. LV is evil because he decided to be evil. Harry is good because > he decided to be good. To ask for either nature or nurture reasons > would be discounting their free will. I agree with you 100% on that. It IS the choices we make and the responsibility we MUST take for ourselves. We don't start from blank slates, however, and neither did Harry or Tom. It would be interesting to see the "evil" Harry and the "good" Tom that might have resulted from different choices on either hand. "Evil" Harry might have manipulated the people around him and traded on his fame to take advantage of others; "good" Tom, while sometimes ruthless, uses his qualities to fight fire with fire. Very speculative, and who knows how it might have turned out? Jim Jim From foxmoth at qnet.com Tue Nov 2 16:29:27 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Tue, 02 Nov 2004 16:29:27 -0000 Subject: The intended murder of Pettigrew and moral corruption (Was; Vengeance on Sna In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117067 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "dumbledore11214" wrote: > > > Magda: > > No it wouldn't. The MOM is far too attached to its preconceived notions - and besides, they'd still have Sirius pegged as the killer of a dozen muggles. What had to be proved was that Peter was capable of killing all those people and a dead Peter wasn't any good for that. > > > Alla: > > But we don't know, right? Who knows, maybe one person in MoM decided to do his/her duty and try to question the story.< You mean like Shacklebolt and Tonks in OOP? Obviously they believed Sirius was innocent, but if they'd said so out loud, they'd have been sacked. And if Sirius had been caught they couldn't have saved him. Questioning him under veritaserum wouldn't have proved anything to the Ministry, because the Ministry believed Sirius was out of his mind. Pippin From mgrantwich at yahoo.com Tue Nov 2 16:32:53 2004 From: mgrantwich at yahoo.com (Magda Grantwich) Date: Tue, 2 Nov 2004 08:32:53 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Harry's 'Goodness' (was Re: Dirty Harry/Clean Harry) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041102163253.30807.qmail@web53102.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 117068 > 3. If one of the other champions had indeed told Cedric after > Harry, why would Cedric tell anyone ? In particular, why would he > tell Harry ? Neither Fleur nor Krum would have said anything to Cedric. Not because they were evil or selfish people but because of their situations in GOF. Harry was a fellow student of Cedric's, he knew him before the whole issue of the Tournament came up, he was on home ground. Harry knew Cedric as something more than just another competitor. Fleur and Krum were come-from-aways (as they say in Newfoundland), they were living in camps seperated from the Hogwarts students, they both had very strongwilled and competitive headmaster/mistress who they identified with very strongly and they were very conscious of being their schools' champions. Cedric and Harry were the Competition, and they knew them only as people to be defeated. Fleur and Krum hung out with their own schoolmates and didn't mingle with Hogwarts students much. All of these circumstances would discourage any urges to share info or concerns with Harry or Cedric. Magda __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Tue Nov 2 16:35:10 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Tue, 02 Nov 2004 16:35:10 -0000 Subject: Harry's 'Goodness' (was Re: Dirty Harry/Clean Harry) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117069 Jim Ferer wrote : " I'd guess that Mme. Maxime would believe that the other contestants might know, and Karkaroff, cynic that he would be, takes it for granted that the other contestants know. " Del replies : I agree. I believe that Crouch!Moody was right when he said that cheating had always been a part of the TWT. Harry himself didn't cheat, but I guess it was expected that Mme Maxime and Karkaroff would try. Jim wrote : "I think it's valid that you can't hold up this example alone as proof of Harry's sportsmanship, but we see other examples of it. He alwasy seems to focus on his own performance, not on bringing down the others. He competes but doesn't personalize it. They're all signs of the good character we're talking about. Taken that way, he's acting consistently with how we see him throughout the tournament." Del replies : Again, I agree. My intention had only always been to explain why I think that this particular example is not a good one. Del From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Tue Nov 2 16:41:24 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Tue, 02 Nov 2004 16:41:24 -0000 Subject: Good moral core (Re: Dirty Harry/Clean Harry) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117070 Neri wrote : "The problem with both nature and nurture is that they discount the free will. LV would be able to excuse himself with "I'm bad because I have Slytherin's blood in me" (nature) or "I'm bad because I didn't have even a single year with loving parents" (nurture). But JKR's position seems to be that you are not allowed to excuse yourself with such reasons, good as they might be. Both LV and Harry have free will. LV is evil because he decided to be evil. Harry is good because he decided to be good. To ask for either nature or nurture reasons would be discounting their free will." Del replies : I completely agree, but that doesn't answer my questions. It only adds some. 1. Why and when did Harry decide to be good ? 2. Why and when did Tom decide to be evil ? Harry and Tom didn't just wake up one morning and told themselves : "from now on, I'll be good/bad." What pushed one to choose good, and what pushed the other one to choose evil ? Del From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Tue Nov 2 16:45:48 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Tue, 02 Nov 2004 16:45:48 -0000 Subject: Harry's 'Goodness' (was Re: Dirty Harry/Clean Harry) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117071 Finwitch wrote : "So-- as none of them told *Harry*, I believe it's safe to assume that they didn't tell Cedric either." Del replies : Ah ! Now *this* is indeed a strong logical argument in favour of "they didn't tell Cedric". Finwitch wrote : " And for Cedric's part - did he believe Harry? He didn't do well in the task, now did he?" Del replies : If I remember well, the other 2 didn't do too well either, and they knew for sure, so I guess that's no indication. Del From nkafkafi at yahoo.com Tue Nov 2 17:24:29 2004 From: nkafkafi at yahoo.com (nkafkafi) Date: Tue, 02 Nov 2004 17:24:29 -0000 Subject: Good moral core (Re: Dirty Harry/Clean Harry) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117072 > Alla: > > I agree very much, BUT Harry was so very young,when his parents died, > same with Tom Riddle when he was given to the orphanage. They must > have had some examples, I don't know some REASONS to become good or > evil. Am I being confusing? > > Free will is wonderful, but how can two year old or three year old > decide something that big without outside examples or reasons? Del asked in 117070: 1. Why and when did Harry decide to be good ? 2. Why and when did Tom decide to be evil ? Neri: A 3 yrs old perhaps doesn't have a free will, but JKR clearly thinks that a 11 yrs old has one. At what age exactly free will kicks in doesn't really matters. ONCE it did, all your background doesn't count anymore, only your decision. The background might make your choise much more difficult, but it is not A REASON. Asking for background reasons for a free will decision is self-contradictory. JKR also implies that this choice is not a one-shot thing. At 15 James was a bully. He snapped out of it. At 11 Peter was sorted to Gryffindor, and at 18 he joined the Order to fight Voldemort. Then he made the choices to betray his friends, kill 12 innocent muggles and Cedric. These were all his choices, yet JKR seems to imply that he is not completely beyond redemption even now. At 15, Tom Riddle was a talented student, a good-looking boy, a prefect, highly appreciated by both his teachers and his classmates. Yes, he didn't have parents and had to return to the hated muggle orphanage every summer, but he had friends at Hogwarts and many good things to look for in his future. He didn't have to open the Chamber and he didn't have to murder Myrtle. It was his choice. Neri From ExSlytherin at aol.com Tue Nov 2 17:28:47 2004 From: ExSlytherin at aol.com (Mandy) Date: Tue, 02 Nov 2004 17:28:47 -0000 Subject: Detour (Was Re: Draco chapter) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117073 > SSSusan wrote: > Hee! But seriously, that's a good point about unintentional > detours. Kind of like what happened to Harry & Cedric when they > touched the TWT Cup/portkey and found themselves in the graveyard. > A detour for certain, and definitely an unintended one. > > Wonder who/what might lead Draco astray or pop him out of wherever > he is for an unexpected trip elsewhere?? Would it be something > *unpleasant*? (I hope!:-)) > Eustace wrote, > So perhaps he does try to spring Lucius from Azkaban, but ends up > doing something completely unrelated. Then again, nobody seems to > think that Azkaban is going to be very difficult for the DEs to > break out of--Draco's "assistance" might not be needed or even > welcome. Mandy here, I think it would have to be. What about Lucius being executed by LV for completely cocking-up the whole MOM incident. A grieving Draco my make a detour to seek out the only person who can kill LV....Harry. I'm not suggesting Dragco becomes suddenly good, but it might pull him in towards the center of the action in an interesting way. I don't hold with the helping to break daddy out of prison idea, only because of the fact the story is almost always seen though Harry's eyes, and would Harry be with Draco to witness the escape? Although I suppose if LV was to witness it Harry could see it though LV's eyes. Whatever the detour is, it has to involve our Harry in some way. > SSSusan wrote: > It's interesting how quickly we've lost the idea that Azkaban is > difficult to get out of. It took Sirius 12 years to do it and he > was the *first*...but then those DEs broke out en masse, and I guess that's what has made us think it can happen again easily. Voldy's return & his alliance w/ the Dementors and all. Mandy here, Yes. The difficulty with breaking out of Azkaban was because of the Dementor guards, slowly sucking the life out of the inmates and draining them of any will to live, let alone escape. With the Dementor's gone the inmates with resolve and desire could rise up and get out. Perhaps the DE had help from other sources too...loyal house elves delivering cakes with new wands baked inside. Mandy From foxmoth at qnet.com Tue Nov 2 17:37:19 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Tue, 02 Nov 2004 17:37:19 -0000 Subject: Unreliable narrator (Was: Snape's stalling) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117074 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "nkafkafi" wrote: (too closely argued to snip) > Neri: > I think the part that you don't follow is that I'm not talking about > "a reader". I'm talking about particular kinds of readers. To use your terminology, I'm talking about the "conspiracy theorist" reader and the "anti-conspiracy theorist" reader. > > The "anti-conspiracy theorist" reader believes that distrust has its limits. There are some things in the text that are just plain true and you have to trust them. Some anti-conspiracy theorists (probably most of them, certainly myself) believe that Lupin is obviously a good person. Therefore anything that makes him appear not good has some explanation (usually not a flint. It could be a flaw or a mistake of Lupin that makes him more human, but not ESE). You can of course disagree with such a reader, but at least he is consistent. He does not claim to be what he is not. > > The "conspiracy theorist" reader, in contrast, claims to use > "subversive reading" and distrust anything, especially things that appear to be certain. His/her motto is "things are not necessarily what they appear to be". For example, you have often justified ESE!Lupin by saying that he is presented as such a nice person and above any suspicion, therefore he must be the traitor. Now, since Snape usually appears to be a bad person, the conspiracy theoristssaying that he is actually the hero seems like proper "subversive reading". But then we arrive at the end of OotP, and Snape appears at least as an OK guy. The great DD assures us Snape did everything he should have done to prevent the MoM battle. The narrator clearly tells us (I think you have recently quote this yourself) that Harry blames Snape only to relieve his own guilt. Superficially, Snape really appears to have done things right here. But then, a bit of subversive reading discovers a 5 hrs hole in the plot, which Harry DIDN'T notice, which makes OK-guy!Snape look very suspicious, and which DD appears to be covering but doesn't deny outright. What should a REAL conspiracy theorist do? He/she should immediately try to get to the bottom of this and find out who is the ESE here, or at least who is the puppet master, right? So how come all the conspiracy theorists either lose nterest, or try to save Snape's honor by any means including assuming a flint? It seems that they are inconsistent in their own doctrine. One would suspect that they are actually more of Snape apologists than real conspiracy theorists. < Pippin: Well, I won't deny that I am a Snape apologist. I don't see myself as a "conspiracy theorist reader" as you defined the term. I am trying to be an intelligent reader. As an intelligent reader, I have noticed that things in the Potterverse are *sometimes* not what they appear to be, including things that seem so obvious that they are hardly worth investigating --Scabbers as an ordinary rat, for example. It seems very obvious to some people that Snape has such major character flaws that his allegiance to Dumbledore must be phony, however things may appear. It seems very obvious that Lupin has such minor character flaws that he could never support Voldemort. And yet Rowling tells us, in words that I consider beyond doubt, that it is our choices, not our abilities that show what we are. So it is to the characters' choices rather than their proclivities that I look when I want to understand them. Lupin, IMO, has made some very disturbing choices, and the rationales offered on his behalf are for the most part not in the books. One might suspect that the motive is Lupin apology rather than a careful reading of the text Snape has made some disturbing choices too, but we've been given some explanation for most of them, including the one at issue here. The explanation for the delay was that Snape was not concerned about Harry's whereabouts until he failed to return from the forest. That is in keeping with the general theme in OOP of people doing the wrong thing for the right reason. For once, Harry keeps his curiousity in check and doesn't use the mirror. For once, Dumbledore gives into his feelings for Harry and doesn't tell him about the prophecy. For once, Hermione stops nagging Harry and accompanies him to the MOM without any further complaint. For once, Snape holds back his usual feeling that Potter and his friends are running blindly into danger with no idea of what they are doing, and does not interfere until it becomes obvious that something is wrong. My understanding is that Snape, despite having some very disturbing character flaws, has put himself under Dumbledore's guidance. He indulges his sadism and vengeance-seeking only within the bounds that Dumbledore and his society have set. OTOH, Lupin, who has only minor character flaws, has put himself under Voldemort's guidance, and is being led, slowly and surely, to moral ruin. After all, if goodness stems from some sort of moral core, as some on another thread are positing, then there's no need for a moral code or moral guidance, and there's no point to Rowling writing what she calls "very moral books." People who lack moral cores won't be influenced, while people who have them don't need to be influenced. Pippin From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Tue Nov 2 17:43:08 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Tue, 02 Nov 2004 17:43:08 -0000 Subject: Good moral core (Re: Dirty Harry/Clean Harry) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117075 > Neri: > > A 3 yrs old perhaps doesn't have a free will, but JKR clearly thinks > that a 11 yrs old has one. > > At what age exactly free will kicks in doesn't really matters. ONCE > it did, all your background doesn't count anymore, only your > decision. The background might make your choise much more difficult, > but it is not A REASON. Asking for background reasons for a free will > decision is self-contradictory. Alla: I think we got a little confused here or maybe it is just me. What do you think is the reason for Harry to choose the side of good? To make his choice, he must have had SOME reason, instead of just saying I want to be good from now on. Why did he want to be good? Neri: > At 15, Tom Riddle was a talented student, a good-looking boy, a > prefect, highly appreciated by both his teachers and his classmates. > Yes, he didn't have parents and had to return to the hated muggle > orphanage every summer, but he had friends at Hogwarts and many good > things to look for in his future. He didn't have to open the Chamber > and he didn't have to murder Myrtle. It was his choice. > Alla: No, he did not have to do all that and I have no sympathy whatsoever towards the choices he made. Moreover, I have less trouble understanding why Tom Riddle made them than why Harry did. Tom hated his father with all his heart and perhaps his sociopathy went from there. But what made Harry's free will to work that way? He clearly made his choices earlier than he was eleven. Why? From ExSlytherin at aol.com Tue Nov 2 17:54:01 2004 From: ExSlytherin at aol.com (Mandy) Date: Tue, 02 Nov 2004 17:54:01 -0000 Subject: Draco chapter (was: What we find there) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117076 catkind wrote: heavly snipped > Another wild suggestion as to how to get Draco into the book so > early: Narcissa Black might feel obliged to attend Sirius' wake, at > the mysterious Spinners End of course, with unwilling sprog in tow. > (After all, it seems that wizard law will hand Grimmauld Place to > either Narcissa or Bellatrix, if Sirius couldn't be disinherited > neither can they. ) > > pulling its dunce's cap firmly down over its ears) Mandy here, Not such a wild idea. I was happily enjoying thoughts of Sirius funeral and the delightfully wicked reunion of at least two of the Sisters Black but then I realized that there is absolutely no way Sirius can have a funeral of any kind. Sirius Black's death can not be acknowledged without the severe embarrassment of the MOM. And conveniently for the Ministry there isn't even a body to hide. The ministry simply can not admit to the fact that an escaped convict, on the run, got access to the MoM building, fought a fight inside it with LV himself and was killed in the Ministry's own basement by another escaped convict. The whole saga will be buried before you can say whitewash. Ah well. It was a nice idea though. Mandy From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Tue Nov 2 18:22:34 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Tue, 02 Nov 2004 18:22:34 -0000 Subject: Good moral core (Re: Dirty Harry/Clean Harry) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117077 Neri wrote : "At what age exactly free will kicks in doesn't really matters. ONCE it did, all your background doesn't count anymore, only your decision. The background might make your choise much more difficult, but it is not A REASON. Asking for background reasons for a free will decision is self-contradictory." Del replies : I'm slightly uneasy when I read that. To me, free will is the ability to choose between different options. However, one must feel like they have a choice before they are able to make that choice, and this is where background and environment kick in. If their background doesn't let them see that there are alternatives, how free are they really to choose ? For example : if a child is taught (actively or passively) to systematically defend themselves in the most violent way possible, and if that method always works to their advantage, it is unlikely that he will choose non-violent methods of defense once his free will kicks in. He won't even realise that there are other methods available, not before he grows up quite a bit and looks around and/or unless he finds a new mentor. Another example : if a child is taught (by exemple or otherwise) by everyone around him to despise and be cruel to some categories of people, it is highly unlikely that by the age he is 11 he will think otherwise. Not impossible, just unlikely. Neri wrote : "At 15, Tom Riddle was a talented student, a good-looking boy, a prefect, highly appreciated by both his teachers and his classmates. Yes, he didn't have parents and had to return to the hated muggle orphanage every summer, but he had friends at Hogwarts and many good things to look for in his future. He didn't have to open the Chamber and he didn't have to murder Myrtle. It was his choice. " Del replies : I agree that it was his choice. But I wonder how much of a choice it felt *to him*. To us, it is obvious that leading a nice life, maybe getting married and having children, those were things to look forward to. But I don't get the feeling that Tom Riddle *ever* felt that way. When I read CoS, I get the feeling that Tom was only concerned about 2 things : power, and vengeance. The way he talks about his friends makes me feel like he never *rejoiced* in those friendships : they didn't bring him fuzzy feelings, only *admirers*. It was already about power. As for all the respect he was getting from everyone, it seems obvious to me that it didn't make him feel good about himself or anything : he only liked it because of the *power* it gave him. I strongly feel that 16-year-old Tom didn't feel that respect *itself* was something worth obtaining : only the power it brings seemed to be of any interest to him. So I'm wondering how much of a choice Tom ever felt he had. It seems to me that as soon as he discovered about his identity, he felt he was born to be the Heir of Slytherin, and to follow in Slytherin's footsteps. He talks about it as though it was obvious, not as though he had chosen that path. Similarly, I get the feeling that Harry was born to be good, he was born to be LV's nemesis. Right from the beginning of PS/SS, we see him doing good things, but we're rarely told *why* he makes good choices. Even when he befriends Ron, it reads as though he first did what was right, and then he discovered that it feels good. Harry systematically makes the good choices, but we don't know *why*. We rarely see him considering the alternative and then basing his decision on precise reasons or beliefs. It always goes back to "this is the right thing to do". But why ?? Del, confused. From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Tue Nov 2 18:53:06 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Tue, 02 Nov 2004 18:53:06 -0000 Subject: Was Harry designed as the Anti-LV weapon ? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117078 While answering on another thread, I had this very disturbing idea. Consider the following facts : * There were 2 young couples in the first Order (maybe more, but we know of those 2 only) : the Potters, and the Longbottoms. * Those 2 couples conceived their first kid after or around the time they entered the Order. * Those 2 couples gave birth 1 day apart. * Those 2 couples had good reasons *not* to have a kid at that time. The Longbottoms were both Aurors, ie soldiers during a war, not the best time to conceive a child for soldiers. The Potters were extremely young and supposedly actively engaged in the battle as well. * A Prophecy was given, not even 2 months before the birth of the kids, announcing that one of them would vanquish LV. * Both kids grew up in extremely difficult circumstances, and yet both turned out extremely good kids : courageous, not resentful, tenacious, intelligent, and so on. Well, I can't help but wonder what's going on there. Are all those things just coincidences, or were they planned ? Could it be that Harry and Neville were deliberately conceived as the ultimate anti-LV weapon ? Could it be that the Prophecy was not a total surprise for DD and some others in the Order ? Could it be the reason Harry and Neville both have such indestructible good cores ? And the more pressure is applied on them by LV and his DEs, the more they fight. So here is my theory : DD knew that nothing or nobody already existing in the world could destroy LV. That's why the Order set out to create the perfect anti-LV soldier. It could explain a few things, but before I launch into that, I'd like to know if you think it's plausible ? Del From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Tue Nov 2 18:53:40 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Tue, 02 Nov 2004 18:53:40 -0000 Subject: The intended murder of Pettigrew and moral corruption (Was; Vengeance on Sna In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117079 > > Alla previously: > > > > But we don't know, right? Who knows, maybe one person in > MoM decided to do his/her duty and try to question the story.< Pippin: > You mean like Shacklebolt and Tonks in OOP? Obviously they > believed Sirius was innocent, but if they'd said so out loud, they'd > have been sacked. And if Sirius had been caught they couldn't > have saved him. Questioning him under veritaserum wouldn't > have proved anything to the Ministry, because the Ministry > believed Sirius was out of his mind. > Alla: No, actually, I was thinking someone higher up - like Amelia Bones for example. Going back to the initial speculation, all what I am saying that it is PLAUSIBLE to believe that had Harry not stopped Sirius and Remus from killing Peter, the alternate universe story would turn out for better not for worse. Of course, many additional factors may have come out into play OR NOT. It is possible that Sirius would have given a hearing at that point. Whether Ministry thought that Sirius was out of his mind also would not matter - since presumabley the person cannot fool this potion, right? From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Tue Nov 2 19:04:57 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Tue, 02 Nov 2004 19:04:57 -0000 Subject: Was Harry designed as the Anti-LV weapon ? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117080 Alla: I believe I read similar idea of Harry's conception as anti-LV weapon. (Was it Kneasy? I am not sure) I disagree unsurprisingly on several grounds. Del snip. > * Those 2 couples had good reasons *not* to have a kid at that time. > The Longbottoms were both Aurors, ie soldiers during a war, not the > best time to conceive a child for soldiers. The Potters were extremely > young and supposedly actively engaged in the battle as well. Alla: Well, yes, it is a good idea not to have kids when you are fighting the war on the "practical grounds". Two young couples who are in love may not consider the practical consequences of their decision to have children at war time. Del: > Could it be that Harry and Neville were deliberately conceived as the > ultimate anti-LV weapon ? Alla: If they did not hear the Prophecy yet prior to conceiving Harry and Neville, why did they decide to make children weaons, why not train any of the adults to do so? Del: > Could it be that the Prophecy was not a total surprise for DD and some > others in the Order ? Alla: What are you saying? That the Prohecy was really given earlier than 2 months prior to children's birth? I am confused. Del: > So here is my theory : > DD knew that nothing or nobody already existing in the world could > destroy LV. That's why the Order set out to create the perfect anti- LV > soldier. Alla: Right, but how would they know that the child will be "perfect weapon"? Which conditions were needed to be fulfilled for that? Del: > It could explain a few things, but before I launch into that, I'd like > to know if you think it's plausible ? Alla: Absolutely, it is plausible. It is just one of those things, which I hope will not come to be true on "metathinking" grounds. It is one thing for child to choose to be a hero, it is another to learn that you were created as robot who really did not have any choice in the matter. From bboyminn at yahoo.com Tue Nov 2 19:17:33 2004 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Tue, 02 Nov 2004 19:17:33 -0000 Subject: Totally Obssessed - Found It! - Spinners End - Near BRISTOL! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117081 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Geoff Bannister" wrote: > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Steve" wrote: > > > > bboyminn: > > So, yes, I am making a connnection between Hagrid's flight with > > Harry that passed somewhere near Bristol to Surrey the night they > > drop Harry at the Dusleys. > > > > Geoff: > If Hagrid was trying to avoid built-up areas, he would have swung > south to avoid BIA. > > But that still begs my question - why are you equating Spinners End > with Godric's Hollow which was Hagrid's route in 1981? Is there > evidence that they are (1) the same place or (2) near each other? I > thought Spinners End had just come out of the woodwork as one of the > newly-revealed chapter titles.... > > Geoff bboyminn: Sorry Geoff, but I think you are looking a little too deep. Everyone quickly found Spinners End (never seen with an apostrophe) in the industrial park, but the fact that it is vaguely near Dursley doesn't mean much. On the other hand, I found Spinners End very near Bristol and Bristol does have significants in the books. In fact, Bristol surrounds one of the main sub-mysteries of the books; where was Harry coming from the night Hagrid delivered him to the Dursleys that required a flight near/over Bristol? So, there COULD be a connection between Spinners End and Bristol, but it's extremely unlikely there is any connection between Spinners End and Dursley (the town). In addition, if you read my whole post, and I'm sure you did, you would have seen that other than pointing out the connection between Spinners End and Bristol which is Hargid's flight, I'm more incline to think there is no connection between JKR's Spinners End and the real world which means the real world location of Spinners End is not significant to the books. So, in conclusion, a connection can be made between Spinner End, Bristol, and the Books and, so far, is the only connection that can be made at all unless you willing to stretch it to a connection between spinners and spiders which is a very long stretch. Not finding relevant, just searching for it. Steve/bboyminn (was bboy_mn) From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com Tue Nov 2 19:20:46 2004 From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (arrowsmithbt) Date: Tue, 02 Nov 2004 19:20:46 -0000 Subject: Spinners End in Sandwell (near Birmingham) and Dudley (OT) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117082 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Geoff Bannister" wrote: > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "arrowsmithbt" > wrote: > > > > Kneasy: > > Tut, tut. > > It's got nothing at all to do with Birmingham and never has. > > > > I speak as someone who was born and bred there, though I've since > > moved on. > > All the old towns that make up the administrative abortion that > is > > Sandwell (Oldbury, West Bromwich, Smethwick etc.) were even in > > a different county (Staffs) to Brum (Warks). > > Geoff: > My apologies. I have a naughty tendency to mix up Birmingham with the > West Midlands authority. You did once comment that you had worked in > Brum - ambulances? I didn't realise you also hailed from the area. > Apologies accepted. No, I can't conceive of a Spinners End from the Black Country inspiring JKR except as maybe where Voldy hangs out - somewhat similar to Orthanc when Saruman got ideas above his station. Erm... not quite ambulances; I ran one of the two regional Cytogenetics labs. Kneasy From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Tue Nov 2 19:30:08 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Tue, 02 Nov 2004 19:30:08 -0000 Subject: Was Harry designed as the Anti-LV weapon ? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117083 Alla wrote : " I believe I read similar idea of Harry's conception as anti-LV weapon. (Was it Kneasy? I am not sure)" Del replies : That could very well be. I haven't read every post, far from it. In fact, it is more than probable that somebody already had such an idea. I do solemny swear, though, that I personally never read that idea before. But even if it was published before, we can still give it another try, right :-) ? Alla wrote : " Well, yes, it is a good idea not to have kids when you are fighting the war on the "practical grounds". Two young couples who are in love may not consider the practical consequences of their decision to have children at war time." Del replies : One couple, I could understand, but both of them seems a bit too much for me. Especially in the case of the Longbottoms : there were Aurors, after all, they had a duty to their country. Alice becoming unavailable for reason of pregnancy was not the best way to fulfill that duty IMO, especially since there seems to have been quite a shortage of good guys at the time. Alla wrote : "If they did not hear the Prophecy yet prior to conceiving Harry and Neville, why did they decide to make children weaons, why not train any of the adults to do so?" Del replies : There could be a number of reasons for that. The most obvious for me would be that DD had somehow determined that there wasn't anyone on Earth who could defeat LV. LV wasn't just a wizard anymore. He had become immortal, among other things. Alla wrote: "What are you saying? That the Prohecy was really given earlier than 2 months prior to children's birth? I am confused." Del replies : What I meant is that maybe the Order *hoped* for some sign that their plan had worked. So maybe when they heard about the Prophecy, they weren't surprised because they expected something like that. Alla wrote : "Right, but how would they know that the child will be "perfect weapon"? Which conditions were needed to be fulfilled for that?" Del replies : I have a few ideas about that, but I welcome any input from other posters. Alla wrote : "It is one thing for child to choose to be a hero, it is another to learn that you were created as robot who really did not have any choice in the matter." Del replies : But this is *already* the case ! Harry was designed as LV's vanquisher before he was even born ! He NEVER had a choice in the matter. The only difference with this theory is that Harry did not become the Hero by accident. It's not the Fates who woke up one day and decided that to-be-born!Harry would be the Vanquisher. It was the Order. Del From ginnysthe1 at yahoo.com Tue Nov 2 19:35:45 2004 From: ginnysthe1 at yahoo.com (ginnysthe1) Date: Tue, 02 Nov 2004 19:35:45 -0000 Subject: Animagus properties, Thestral guts (was Re: Is Harry a Metamorphmagus?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117084 Hi! Kim here, back in the discussion after a few days off (and after reading the replies of Steve, Jcb54 and Ladyramkin). In reply to my question about how animagus transformation can happen without it being innate or using a wand or potion, Imamommy wrote: > I don't quite know what it's like; maybe like gaining fluency in a foreign language, so that eventually the person can read, comprehend, speak and even think (and dream) in that language? But different. It seems to me that there is definitely a point where one *becomes* an animagus, but I wonder what must be done to get to that point.< > On a side note, do you think a person's animagus animal must always correspond with their patronus animal? James is the only person I remember knowing this about, but I can't think of any contradictions to this theory.< Kim replies to side note: My thoughts on this (and I think Steve/bboyminn says something similar) is that in James's case, his stag Animagus was Harry's (his son's) Patronus. It seems to suggest then for the general rule to be that your Patronus animal is the Animagus of your father (or other protector). But that would provoke more questions, like what was James's Patronus animal? Would we assume it had to be the animagus of *his* father (i.e. Harry's grandfather) and so was Grandpa Potter's animagus also a stag? Not necessarily, right? Because if that's so, then what would inspire the Patronus of a witch or wizard whose father/protector was incapable of Animagus transformation, such as the Muggle parents of Hermione? It seems that all the DA kids were pretty much able to learn the Patronus charm in OotP, weren't they, but their parents couldn't all have had Animagus ability, so where did their Patronus animals come from? And we can't assume that all the DA kids will end up with Animagus ability, so their future kids won't be able to use their parents' Animagi for Patronuses (Patroni? ;-)). I wish they would all become Animagi, because that might be really cool reading, but I've read other posters saying that JKR has stated that the 3 mouseketeers (H, H, and R) *won't* become Animagi. Although even that statement seemed not to be totally definitive depending on how you interpret JKR's words... isn't she the dickens? ;-) Anyway, I think Imamommy has a good idea, that maybe once you learn to transform yourself into an animal, perhaps in the manner Steve suggests (which makes sense -- definitely pitiful if you were to become a may fly; though Rita Skeeter's beetle was risky enough -- imagine if someone had spotted her and smashed her with a book!), you'll eventually become proficient enough to transform at will, so that wands are no longer necessary (and a potion never was). And it's true that other witches/wizards wouldn't always be able to do that, the same way some people in the Muggleworld can pick up languages with ease whereas others are more or less hopeless at it (though in the case of language acquisition, I think almost anyone can become fluent in a second language if they start studying it before the age of 12 -- or so I read once upon a time; but maybe that doesn't apply to Animagus ability). I hope my reply doesn't sound too rambly and confusing. Imamommy continued: > Off this topic completely, if Thestrals are fleshless, do they have guts and, if so, what holds them in? If not, how do they digest the meat that they eat?< Kim here again: This question and the ensuing discussion thread have inspired me to go back and read up on Thestrals. I always love any excuse to re- read parts of OotP, my favorite book in the series. So thanks! P.S. I bet I'm not alone in having animal preferences -- I'm intrigued by thestrals, hippogriffs, the Animagus animals, Fawkes the phoenix, the mail owls, among others, but you can keep blast-ended skrewts and flobberworms! Kim From mgrantwich at yahoo.com Tue Nov 2 19:40:47 2004 From: mgrantwich at yahoo.com (Magda Grantwich) Date: Tue, 2 Nov 2004 11:40:47 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Was Harry designed as the Anti-LV weapon ? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041102194047.21933.qmail@web53110.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 117085 > So here is my theory : > DD knew that nothing or nobody already existing in the world could > destroy LV. That's why the Order set out to create the perfect > anti-LV soldier. > > It could explain a few things, but before I launch into that, I'd > like to know if you think it's plausible ? > > Del I don't think it's plausible. You can't create something to anticipate a prophecy. Also it would be very unsatisfying plot-wise as it would take a fair amount of tension out of the backstory and much out of future events as well. It gives too much credit to a puppet-master!Dumbledore and not enough credit to Harry personally. Magda __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com Tue Nov 2 19:44:21 2004 From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (arrowsmithbt) Date: Tue, 02 Nov 2004 19:44:21 -0000 Subject: Was Harry designed as the Anti-LV weapon ? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117086 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "delwynmarch" wrote: > > Alla wrote : > " I believe I read similar idea of Harry's conception as anti-LV > weapon. (Was it Kneasy? I am not sure)" > > Del replies : > That could very well be. I haven't read every post, far from it. In > fact, it is more than probable that somebody already had such an idea. > I do solemny swear, though, that I personally never read that idea before. > No, I didn't suggest that Harry was *conceived* as an anti-Voldy weapon, just that either before (when the protection was emplaced) or just after the events at Godric's Hollow DD decided to turn him into Weapon!Harry. In effect it makes the Prophecy self-fulfilling. Of course it's only now that this is beginning to sink in. It'll be interesting to see how Harry reacts when he realises what future DD had planned for him all along. Kneasy From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Tue Nov 2 19:51:11 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Tue, 02 Nov 2004 19:51:11 -0000 Subject: Was Harry designed as the Anti-LV weapon ? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117087 > Del replies : > But even if it was published before, we can still give it another try, > right :-) ? Alla: Of course, we can. > Del replies : > One couple, I could understand, but both of them seems a bit too much > for me. Especially in the case of the Longbottoms : there were Aurors, > after all, they had a duty to their country. Alice becoming > unavailable for reason of pregnancy was not the best way to fulfill > that duty IMO, especially since there seems to have been quite a > shortage of good guys at the time. Alla: Not for me. During the 1941-1945 war quite a few people who became involved during the combat actions (like soldiers and nurses, since women did not have to serve an active duty) had children despite all inconveniences it could cost. > Alla wrote previously: > "Right, but how would they know that the child will be "perfect > weapon"? Which conditions were needed to be fulfilled for that?" > > Del replies : > I have a few ideas about that, but I welcome any input from other posters. Alla: Well, share please, because I don't have any. :) > Del replies : > But this is *already* the case ! Harry was designed as LV's vanquisher > before he was even born ! He NEVER had a choice in the matter. > > The only difference with this theory is that Harry did not become the > Hero by accident. It's not the Fates who woke up one day and decided > that to-be-born!Harry would be the Vanquisher. It was the Order. Alla: I disagree, because as I said previously I have astrong doubt that Dumbledore correctly interpreted the Prophecy and that is why I feel that Harry had and will have mich more choices in the matter than we think. Dumbledore cannot be always right, he just can't :o) He pretty much acknowledged it at the end of OOP and I think that at the end of the series if he is still alive , he will be in for another rude awakening :o) Do you remember Firenze's divination lesson and the main idea Harry took from it that humans interpretation of divination teachings is very often incorrect or something to that effect ? I believe that to be one of the hints that the final events may not happen exactly how Dumbledore thinks they will, that is why I believe that the idea of designing a weapon prior to his birth is very much against of the theme of choices. But of course, there is nothing in canon which squashes this theory yet. From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Tue Nov 2 19:59:54 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Tue, 02 Nov 2004 19:59:54 -0000 Subject: Was Harry designed as the Anti-LV weapon ? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117088 Kneasy > No, I didn't suggest that Harry was *conceived* as an anti-Voldy weapon, snip Alla: Apologies then. I am still thinking I saw it somewhere Kneasy: > Of course it's only now that this is beginning to sink in. It'll be interesting > to see how Harry reacts when he realises what future DD had planned for > him all along. Alla: I am not convinced that Dumbledore planned this future for him. I am thinking more along the lines that when he learned about this future, he started making plans, but of course, JMO. Magda snip. > It gives too much credit to a puppet-master!Dumbledore and not enough > credit to Harry personally. Alla: Agreed. Absolutely and without hesitation From foxmoth at qnet.com Tue Nov 2 20:04:14 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Tue, 02 Nov 2004 20:04:14 -0000 Subject: The intended murder of Pettigrew and moral corruption (Was; Vengeance on Sna In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117089 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "dumbledore11214" wrote: > Alla: > > No, actually, I was thinking someone higher up - like Amelia Bones for example. Going back to the initial speculation, all what I am saying that it is PLAUSIBLE to believe that had Harry not stopped Sirius and Remus from killing Peter, the alternate universe story would turn out for better not for worse. > > Of course, many additional factors may have come out into play OR NOT. > > It is possible that Sirius would have given a hearing at that point. Whether Ministry thought that Sirius was out of his mind also would not matter - since presumabley the person cannot fool this potion, right?< That's not what Fudge thinks: "As Minerva and Severus have doubtless told you," said Dumbledore, "we heard Barty Crouch confess. Under the influence of Veritaserum, he told us how he was smuggled out of Azkaban, and how Voldemort--learning of his continued existence from Bertha Jorkins -- went to free him from his father and used him to capture Harry. The plan worked, I tell you. Crouch has helped Voldemort to return." "See here, Dumbledore," said Fudge, and Harry was astonished to see a slight smile dawning on his face, "you -- you can't seriously believe that. You-Know-Who -- back? Come now, come now....certainly, Crouch may have *believed* himself to be acting upon You-Know-Who's orders--but to take the word of a lunatic like that, Dumbledore...." --GoF ch36. Clearly Fudge thinks that the potion only forces the person to state what he believes to be true, not the objective truth. And since he and Macnair, not Amelia Bones, were at Hogwarts that night, and the authorization for the dementor's kiss had already been given, there is little hope in my heart that Sirius would have escaped the Kiss if he had shown up with Pettigrew's blood on his hands, even if Sirius had been questioned under veritaserum. One can certainly devise an alternate scenario in which Amelia Bones drops by for a cuppa, orders a trial for Black, and he is acquitted of murdering the twelve Muggles, despite the recorded testimony of eyewitnesses who all swore they had seen Black blow them to smithereens and then burst out laughing. But I can't say I find it more likely than the one I proposed. Pippin From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Tue Nov 2 20:21:48 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Tue, 02 Nov 2004 20:21:48 -0000 Subject: "Goody Two Shoes" Re: Dirty Harry/Clean Harry In-Reply-To: <20041102001418.30499.qmail@web53105.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117090 Kelsey: > What word or term could be used to explain someone > who's <<'got a good heart and always seeks the > altruistic action'>> [love that quote, SSSusan, > it's exactly what I want to say!]? I don't think > the word 'good' is right. It's vague and not > strong enough. > > Kelsey, who's settling for the term 'ultra, > possibly-unrealistically good moral core'. SSSusan: I'm glad you liked the phrase, Kelsey. That gives me two good ones this week, since somebody else liked my term for McGonagall's "character-building consequences." But it's such a shame I can't come up with any deliciously dastardly conspiracy theories!!! Why can't I be creative that way?? As for alternatives to "goody-two-shoes" or "good," what about the word "noble"? Would that work? "Beneficent"? Oooh-- how 'bout "magnanimous"? Feeling thesaurusy today, Siriusly Snapey Susan...who voted early but not often today and who's thrilled w/ the thought that U.S. voter turnout might top 65% for the first time in decades! From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com Tue Nov 2 20:28:29 2004 From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (arrowsmithbt) Date: Tue, 02 Nov 2004 20:28:29 -0000 Subject: Was Harry designed as the Anti-LV weapon ? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117091 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "dumbledore11214" wrote: > > Magda > > snip. > > > It gives too much credit to a puppet-master!Dumbledore and not > enough > > credit to Harry personally. > > > Alla: > > Agreed. Absolutely and without hesitation How can Harry claim the credit? It's only now at the end of book 5 that he has the faintest idea of what it's all about. He's been stumbling about in the dark, encountering Voldy when he least expects it, escaping by the skin of his teeth and incredible (some might say unbelievable) luck. And in every escape he has outside help - the Protection in PS/SS, Fawkes in CoS, the Timeturner in PoA, conflict of wands in GoF, DD himself in OoP. If any one of these hadn't been there he'd be dead. You'll note that the Protection, Fawkes and the Timeturner are all associated with DD - and he was aware that Fawkes' feathers were in both wands. Then he turns up himself in OoP. Meanwhile DD arranges for him to have extremely useful extra lessons (not given to *any* other student - Patronus! and Occlumency) without bothering to give him the whole story. If that's not Puppetmaster!DD I don't know what is. Kneasy From chnc1024 at AOL.COM Tue Nov 2 20:24:46 2004 From: chnc1024 at AOL.COM (chnc1024 at AOL.COM) Date: Tue, 2 Nov 2004 15:24:46 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Was Harry designed as the Anti-LV weapon ? Message-ID: <6.37203f87.2eb9470e@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 117092 In a message dated 11/2/2004 11:39:03 AM Pacific Standard Time, delwynmarch at yahoo.com writes: Del replies : One couple, I could understand, but both of them seems a bit too much for me. Especially in the case of the Longbottoms : there were Aurors, after all, they had a duty to their country. Alice becoming unavailable for reason of pregnancy was not the best way to fulfill that duty IMO, especially since there seems to have been quite a shortage of good guys at the time. ***************************************************************** Just to add a bit of perspective on this. Last year, I knew of 4 couples who became pregnant only a month apart from each other. 2 of my friends discovered they were to have babies. My husband and I became #3 and my hubby's aunt was #4. That's 4 babies with only 1 month and just a day or 2 apart from each other. We were the ONLY couple who actually decided to have a baby on purpose. Even if the Potters and Longbottoms had actually decided to have a baby at the same time, there is no guarantee that it's going to happen! Some people try for a very long time to have babies with no success. Even if you take fertility drugs, or Invetro Fertilization, it doesn't mean that you will be pregnant! (And as I said 2 of my friends became pregnant within a month and they were in no way trying!) It is odd however that the prophecy was made and just happened to be about a baby born at this time! But I don't see how the could be sure to have a baby "as the seventh month dies"! Even if the WW has some type of fertility spell or something, is it possible to control the date that labor starts or the length of time?? Can the prevent prematurity? Can they control over due babies, kind of like a WW version of pictocin (the synthetic form of ocitocen produced naturally in the body of a pregnant woman and when reaches a certain level triggers labor)? If it is possible for the WW to more defiantly control reproduction than here in the RW, then I suppose it could be part of some master plan to defeat Voldemort. But still I have a problem with that. I even before my daughter was born never wanted to place limitations, or expectations upon her. All I wanted was for her to be healthy and happy, and for her to have the opportunity to be the best person she wants to be. >From Harry's memory of her, trying to protect him, she sounds very much that sort of mother as well, I don't see Lily like some one who has a baby to get what she wants out of it. Also, how could they control Voldemort marking one of the boy's as an equal??? Chancie [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From bboyminn at yahoo.com Tue Nov 2 20:29:36 2004 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Tue, 02 Nov 2004 20:29:36 -0000 Subject: Good moral core - Choices & Circumstances In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117093 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "dumbledore11214" wrote: > > > > Neri: > > At 15, Tom Riddle was a talented student, a good-looking boy, a > > prefect, highly appreciated by both his teachers and his > > classmates. > > > > Yes, he didn't have parents and had to return to the hated muggle > > orphanage every summer, but he had friends at Hogwarts and many > > good things to look for in his future. He didn't have to open > > the Chamber and he didn't have to murder Myrtle. It was his > > choice. > > > Alla: > > No, he did not have to do all that and I have no sympathy whatsoever > towards the choices he made. Moreover, I have less trouble > understanding why Tom Riddle made them than why Harry did. Tom hated > his father with all his heart and perhaps his sociopathy went from > there. > > > But what made Harry's free will to work that way? He clearly made > his choices earlier than he was eleven. Why? bboyminn: Interesting that you bring Tom's feeling toward his father into the discussion. But I don't think the key is that he hated is father, as much as it is WHY he hated his father. Tom Riddle - abondoned and denied by his father before and after his birth. Harry Potter - whose mother and father sacrificed themselves out of love for their child. While we can easily find similarities between the two, I think the above defines the critical difference between the two. One was left with the bitter impression that he was worthless, the other was valued more highly than life itself. In addition, Harry did at least get 18 month of nurturing love before he lost his parents. Just a thought. Steve/bboyminn (was bboy_mn) From chnc1024 at AOL.COM Tue Nov 2 20:41:35 2004 From: chnc1024 at AOL.COM (chnc1024 at AOL.COM) Date: Tue, 2 Nov 2004 15:41:35 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Was Harry designed as the Anti-LV weapon ? Message-ID: <12d.4e6ecb55.2eb94aff@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 117094 In a message dated 11/2/2004 12:34:36 PM Pacific Standard Time, arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com writes: Meanwhile DD arranges for him to have extremely useful extra lessons (not given to *any* other student - Patronus! and Occlumency) without bothering to give him the whole story. ************************************************************************* Chancie: While I can see your point in Occlumency, do we know that DD had Lupin teach Harry "Expecto Patronum"? I was under the impression that Lupin taught Harry that on his own to help Harry, Unlike the ordered lessons Snape gave. Then again I could be wrong! Chancie~who definatly knows that if she is wrong, it wouldn't be the first time (or the last for that matter!) [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From hautbois1 at comcast.net Tue Nov 2 21:53:49 2004 From: hautbois1 at comcast.net (ohnooboe) Date: Tue, 02 Nov 2004 21:53:49 -0000 Subject: Animagus properties, Thestral guts (was Re: Is Harry a Metamorphmagus?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117095 Kim wrote > On a side note, do you think a person's animagus animal must always > correspond with their patronus animal? This may have already been said, but my thought had always been that the animagus form corresponded directly to personality traits or the "inner self". It always seemed fitting to me that James became a stag while less "desirable" people because beetles and rats (Rita and Peter). Perhaps animagi don't have much control over the animal they become...gods help the person whose inner self is an elephant... Patrick From distaiyi at yahoo.com Tue Nov 2 22:31:18 2004 From: distaiyi at yahoo.com (distaiyi) Date: Tue, 02 Nov 2004 22:31:18 -0000 Subject: Totally Obssessed - Found It! - Spinners End - Near BRISTOL! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117096 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Steve" wrote: > It was just a thought. > > Steve/bboyminn (was bboy_mn) I have been lax in keeping up on threads lately but... It might be that she's refering to the end of one very large spider with whom we've become familiar. Just a thought. Distaiyi the Cynical From gbannister10 at aol.com Tue Nov 2 22:38:12 2004 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Tue, 02 Nov 2004 22:38:12 -0000 Subject: Totally Obssessed - Found It! - Spinners End - Near BRISTOL! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117097 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Steve" wrote: > > bboyminn: > In fact, Bristol surrounds one of > the main sub-mysteries of the books; where was Harry coming from the > night Hagrid delivered him to the Dursleys that required a flight > near/over Bristol? > Geoff: There have been suggestions in the past that Godric's Hollow was in Wales. I've never followed that up but a track from most areas of Wales to Surrey could easily pass over Bristol. Geoff http://www.aspectsofexmoor.com From chnc1024 at AOL.COM Tue Nov 2 22:45:44 2004 From: chnc1024 at AOL.COM (chnc1024 at AOL.COM) Date: Tue, 2 Nov 2004 17:45:44 EST Subject: The only one he ever feared? Message-ID: <97.516d2bdb.2eb96818@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 117099 A thought came to me as I was reading some other posts, and at the risk of sounding very stupid I figured I'd go ahead and throw this on out there. Why is DD the only wizard Voldemort feared? I know that DD is an EXTREMELY powerful wizard, and I'm sure that does have something to do with it, but Voldemort isn't exactly weak. Is there something that DD knows or has done to make Voldemort truly fearful of him? If Voldemort knows about the prophecy (and we all know that he defiantly does, or he wouldn't have tried to kill Harry to begin with) that Trelawney made, then why isn't Harry the one he fears? It seems to me that since Harry is the one who all but killed him at GH, and DD (as far as I know) hasn't been able to hurt Voldemort in any way does he only fear DD? Chancie~who hopes she doesn't sound as stupid as she feels! [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From gbannister10 at aol.com Tue Nov 2 22:49:24 2004 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Tue, 02 Nov 2004 22:49:24 -0000 Subject: Good moral core - Choices & Circumstances In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117100 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Steve" wrote: bboyminn: > > Interesting that you bring Tom's feeling toward his father into the > discussion. But I don't think the key is that he hated is father, as > much as it is WHY he hated his father. > > Tom Riddle - abondoned and denied by his father before and after his > birth. > > Harry Potter - whose mother and father sacrificed themselves out of > love for their child. > > While we can easily find similarities between the two, I think the > above defines the critical difference between the two. One was left > with the bitter impression that he was worthless, the other was valued > more highly than life itself. > > In addition, Harry did at least get 18 month of nurturing love before > he lost his parents. Geoff: The interesting point for me from your comments is that the Dursleys did their damnedest to give Harry the impression that he was worthless and a waste of space, which could easily have overwhelmed the nurture he got for the first 15 months of his life - but it didn't. It underpins what I said in message 117060 about "inclination" to good or bad. Geoff http://www.aspectsofexmoor.com From ginnysthe1 at yahoo.com Tue Nov 2 23:11:39 2004 From: ginnysthe1 at yahoo.com (ginnysthe1) Date: Tue, 02 Nov 2004 23:11:39 -0000 Subject: Animagus properties, Thestral guts (was Re: Is Harry a Metamorphmagus?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117101 Hi! To Patrick, from Kim: Just to clarify, when you wrote "Kim wrote: On a side note, do you think a person's animagus animal must always correspond with their patronus animal?" It wasn't me (Kim) writing that -- I think that question came from Imamommy. My longwinded (as usual) response was in post 117084 (I think). Now Kim responds to Patrick's post: Patrick wrote (in reply to Imamommy's(?) question above): >This may have already been said, but my thought had always been that > the animagus form corresponded directly to personality traits or > the "inner self". It always seemed fitting to me that James became > a stag while less "desirable" people became beetles and rats (Rita > and Peter). Perhaps animagi don't have much control over the > animal they become...gods help the person whose inner self is an > elephant... << Kim now: I'm pretty sure that that has already been said someplace before on this list, and I think it may have originally come from someone quoting something JKR said. Unfortunately I'm really not that good at searching the archives to find relevant earlier posts. But no matter -- maybe you'd have better luck with that than me. In any case, to summarize what seems to be true about Animagi, yes, I agree with you, they seem to correspond to the personality traits of the wizard: Rita's a beetle, Peter's a rat, Sirius is a big black dog, James is a stag, McGonagall's a cat -- is that the full list of Animagi as we know it so far from canon? Those animals all seem to imply the personality type of the witch or wizard. It would be nice though to expound a little on why specifically a beetle fits Rita Skeeter, a stag James, a cat McGonagall, etc. -- any takers?? It also seems to be true on reflection, that so far Animagi animals aren't "magical" or "WW-only" animals, such as dragons or blast-ended skrewts -- none that we know of anyhow. Then we're still not sure if Dumbledore's an Animagus or not (is he a bumblebee as his name implies or some other bug? Other posters, myself included, have discussed DD's Animagus in recent past posts); and we can't say Lupin's inner self is a werewolf since Lupin isn't actually an Animagus. It's also been suggested by someone on the list (whose name escapes me), and I concur, that Fawkes may be the Animagus of Godric Gryffindor (or did I suggest that? Yep, I think it was me). Actually I think the other poster suggested that if Harry does turn out to have an Animagus, that it might be a Phoenix. Anyhow, what do you think about any or all of the above? Cheers, Kim (whose animagus couldn't be an elephant on account of her poor memory for previous posts and other posters' names ;-)) From amycrn4230 at yahoo.com Tue Nov 2 23:20:05 2004 From: amycrn4230 at yahoo.com (amycrn4230) Date: Tue, 02 Nov 2004 23:20:05 -0000 Subject: The only one he ever feared? In-Reply-To: <97.516d2bdb.2eb96818@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117102 chancie wrote: Why is DD the only wizard Voldemort feared? > > I know that DD is an EXTREMELY powerful wizard, and I'm > sure that does have something to do with it, but Voldemort > isn't exactly weak. Is there something that DD knows or has > done to make Voldemort truly fearful of him? If Voldemort > knows about the prophecy (and we all know that he defiantly > does, or he wouldn't have tried to kill Harry to begin with) > that Trelawney made, then why isn't Harry the one he fears? > It seems to me that since Harry is the one who all but killed > him at GH, and DD (as far as I know) hasn't been able to hurt > Voldemort in any way does he only fear DD? > Amy here: We know that LV knows of the prophecy, but not what it says...it smashed before he could hear it. There has been speculation that now that DD let Harry hear the whole thing, now LV knows it because of sharing Harry's thoughts, but I don't necessarily think thats the case. I don't think LV can just know everything Harry thinks at all times, but anyway... I think DD has done some VERY powerful magic, perhaps which LV even studied, but then tweeked to his own liking, and DD did defeat Grindewald and all. It is even in canon that DD knows a lot of the dark magic that LV does, but just chooses not to use it. I guess I think that LV has done his homework, and knows that DD is the only wizard alive that has equal to, or more knowledge than he has, and that scares the begeezus out of him... But DD knows the prophecy says that the only one that can defeat LV is the one born in the seventh month, yada yada yada, and so doesn't waste his time trying to defeat him, but nudges HP along the right path. Amy C.~ From bob.oliver at cox.net Tue Nov 2 23:57:55 2004 From: bob.oliver at cox.net (lupinlore) Date: Tue, 02 Nov 2004 23:57:55 -0000 Subject: Was Harry designed as the Anti-LV weapon ? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117103 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "delwynmarch" wrote: > > While answering on another thread, I had this very disturbing idea. > Consider the following facts : > > Could it be that Harry and Neville were deliberately conceived as the > ultimate anti-LV weapon ? > Hmmm, well, if JKR is going to go the route of Ludlum with a strong dash of Lovecraft, I suppose it is. Somehow I don't see it. Besides, if indeed the Order did such a thing, that would be proof paramount that the Wizarding World isn't worth saving anyway. Let Voldy burn it all, it wouldn't be much of a change for the worse. Lupinlore From nkafkafi at yahoo.com Wed Nov 3 01:00:13 2004 From: nkafkafi at yahoo.com (nkafkafi) Date: Wed, 03 Nov 2004 01:00:13 -0000 Subject: Was Harry designed as the Anti-LV weapon ? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117104 Del wrote: * There were 2 young couples in the first Order (maybe more, but we know of those 2 only) : the Potters, and the Longbottoms. * Those 2 couples conceived their first kid after or around the time they entered the Order. * Those 2 couples gave birth 1 day apart. * Those 2 couples had good reasons *not* to have a kid at that time. * A Prophecy was given, not even 2 months before the birth of the kids, announcing that one of them would vanquish LV. Could it be that Harry and Neville were deliberately conceived as the ultimate anti-LV weapon ? Neri: A very intriguing theory, Del. Actually, it is quite possible that the timeline can be shown to support it. I assume you wrote that the prophecy was given 2 months before Harry's birth because DD says about 2 months before Harry's 16th birthday that he heard the prophecy "a cold and wet night 16 years ago". But we have reasons to think that DD is speaking loosely here. First, there is the "cold and wet night" while DD is saying this in June. Second, when Umbridge inspect Trelawney in the beginning of the OotP school year (that is, only 2 months after Harry's 15th birthday) Trelawney says she had her job for "nearly 16 years". This suggests that she was hired by DD during the end of 1979 or the beginning of 1980. This means that prohecy was actually told about the same time that Harry and Neville were conceived. It could be shortly after that or shortly before that. However, since a prophecy is by definition somewhat deterministic, I'm not sure that all these coincidences necessarily support your theory. That is, maybe they happened because they were fated to happen that way, rather then because DD arranged them to happen. I wrote here before that sometime it is difficult to distinguish between Puppetmaster!JKR and Puppetmaster!DD. Kneasy wrote: How can Harry claim the credit? It's only now at the end of book 5 that he has the faintest idea of what it's all about. He's been stumbling about in the dark, encountering Voldy when he least expects it, escaping by the skin of his teeth and incredible (some might say unbelievable) luck. And in every escape he has outside help - the Protection in PS/SS, Fawkes in CoS, the Timeturner in PoA, conflict of wands in GoF, DD himself in OoP. If any one of these hadn't been there he'd be dead. You'll note that the Protection, Fawkes and the Timeturner are all associated with DD - and he was aware that Fawkes' feathers were in both wands. Then he turns up himself in OoP. Meanwhile DD arranges for him to have extremely useful extra lessons (not given to *any* other student - Patronus! and Occlumency) without bothering to give him the whole story. If that's not Puppetmaster!DD I don't know what is. Neri: If it is Puppetmaster!DD then he's a crazy gambler puppet master. How could he be sure that the Basilisk won't bite Harry's head off instead of only nicking his arm, or that Voldy won't shoot his AK half a second before Harry shot his expelliarmus? If I was a puppet master and the whole WW would depend on my puppet mastering I would have played my cards much more sensibly. I suspect that DD is stumbling in the dark almost as much as Harry is. Neri From mgrantwich at yahoo.com Wed Nov 3 01:00:23 2004 From: mgrantwich at yahoo.com (Magda Grantwich) Date: Tue, 2 Nov 2004 17:00:23 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] The only one he ever feared? In-Reply-To: <97.516d2bdb.2eb96818@aol.com> Message-ID: <20041103010023.51461.qmail@web53109.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 117105 --- chnc1024 at AOL.COM wrote: > A thought came to me as I was reading some other posts, and > at the risk of sounding very stupid I figured I'd go ahead and > throw this on out there. > > Why is DD the only wizard Voldemort feared? Not a stupid question at all. I think V fears DD because DD is the only wizard who can figure out what Voldemort is up to and what he is planning. DD wasn't fooled by the young Tom Riddle's charm when he was a student and he certainly wasn't impressed with the way the MoM was handling the situation in the first Voldy War. It's probably also a healthy respect for DD's powers and experience: a dark lord who's pursuing immortality probably doesn't have much trouble envying the wizard who helped discover the Philosopher's Stone. Magda __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com From nkafkafi at yahoo.com Wed Nov 3 01:21:40 2004 From: nkafkafi at yahoo.com (nkafkafi) Date: Wed, 03 Nov 2004 01:21:40 -0000 Subject: Good moral core (Re: Dirty Harry/Clean Harry) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117106 > Del: > I'm slightly uneasy when I read that. To me, free will is the ability > to choose between different options. However, one must feel like they > have a choice before they are able to make that choice, and this is > where background and environment kick in. If their background doesn't > let them see that there are alternatives, how free are they really to > choose ? > > Another example : if a child is taught (by exemple or otherwise) by > everyone around him to despise and be cruel to some categories of > people, it is highly unlikely that by the age he is 11 he will think > otherwise. Not impossible, just unlikely. > Neri: I guess this is why DD (and apparently JKR) believe in second chances. > Del: > I agree that it was his choice. But I wonder how much of a choice it > felt *to him*. To us, it is obvious that leading a nice life, maybe > getting married and having children, those were things to look forward > to. But I don't get the feeling that Tom Riddle *ever* felt that way. > When I read CoS, I get the feeling that Tom was only concerned about 2 > things : power, and vengeance. Neri: I don't think we have enough information to determine that now, and I suspect that by the end of Book 7, JKR will make it clear that Tom did have a choice. I seem to remember her saying that we will meet Tom Riddle again, though I can't remember the specific interview or chat. > Del: > Similarly, I get the feeling that Harry was born to be good, he was > born to be LV's nemesis. Right from the beginning of PS/SS, we see him > doing good things, but we're rarely told *why* he makes good choices. > Even when he befriends Ron, it reads as though he first did what was > right, and then he discovered that it feels good. Harry systematically > makes the good choices, but we don't know *why*. We rarely see him > considering the alternative and then basing his decision on precise > reasons or beliefs. It always goes back to "this is the right thing to > do". But why ?? Neri: Harry is almost by definition the good hero, so yes, I think he has the talent for making the right choices most of the time. Still, I find it instructive that the prophecy doesn't say who will win. It says Harry has THE POWER to vanquish the Dark Lord, but it doesn't promise us that Harry will use this power. Free will again. Why did Harry befriend Ron rather than Draco in SS/PS? Well, I thought when reading it that the choice was pretty obvious. Ron was nice to him. Draco reminded him of Dudley. Harry also refused to go to Slytherin, in part, because Hagrid told him that Voldemort was in Slytherin, and Hafrid was nice to him too. I think that these were very good reasons for a 11 yrs old, and even for older people. If you don't have a lot of information, going with the nice people is a better bet than going with the nasty people (hey, I just realized this is what JKR said about men ;-) ). If later it turned out you made the wrong choice, this is why we have second chances. Neri From nkafkafi at yahoo.com Wed Nov 3 01:36:07 2004 From: nkafkafi at yahoo.com (nkafkafi) Date: Wed, 03 Nov 2004 01:36:07 -0000 Subject: Unreliable narrator (Was: Snape's stalling) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117107 > Pippin: > > Well, I won't deny that I am a Snape apologist. I don't see > myself as a "conspiracy theorist reader" as you defined the term. > Neri: This is good to know. I hope you won't have troubles being admitted into the Safe House after that last statement ;-) . Still, there are quite a few members in this list who claim to employ "subversive reading" or similar such things. Don't you find it strange that none of them tried to investigate this suspicious hole in the plot? Or perhaps they are all Snape apologists, too? This was my original question. Is "subversive reading" a code name for being a Snape apologist? > Pippin: > > I am trying to be an intelligent reader. As an intelligent reader, I > have noticed that things in the Potterverse are *sometimes* not > what they appear to be, including things that seem so obvious > that they are hardly worth investigating --Scabbers as an ordinary > rat, for example. > Neri: I'm sure I have proved by now that I know things in the Potterverse are *sometimes* not what they appear to be. I just think that there are certain things that cannot be faked. But I think I'll leave out the Lupin discussion until reading the promised ESE!Lupin treatise. My question was concerning Snape. > Pippin: > Snape has made some disturbing choices too, but we've been > given some explanation for most of them, including the one at > issue here. The explanation for the delay was that Snape was > not concerned about Harry's whereabouts until he failed to return > from the forest. Neri: Waiting at least 4 hours, some of them after dark, without even updating HQ about the situation, seems a bit of stretching it. Yet I know that pretty reasonable alternative explanations can be found. But this never stopped the conspiracy theorists before, so I just wondered why it stopped them here. > Pippin: > That is in keeping with the general theme in OOP > of people doing the wrong thing for the right reason. For once, Harry keeps his curiousity in check and doesn't use > the mirror. For once, Dumbledore gives into his feelings for Harry > and doesn't tell him about the prophecy. For once, Hermione > stops nagging Harry and accompanies him to the MOM without > any further complaint. For once, Snape holds back his usual > feeling that Potter and his friends are running blindly into danger > with no idea of what they are doing, and does not interfere until it > becomes obvious that something is wrong. Neri: Hmm. An interesting theory. I would feel better about it if it had some support in canon other than the common theme. Snape trying to change is not something that happens every day, after all ;-) > Pippin: > After all, if goodness stems from some sort of moral core, as > some on another thread are positing, then there's no need for a > moral code or moral guidance, and there's no point to Rowling > writing what she calls "very moral books." People who lack moral > cores won't be influenced, while people who have them don't > need to be influenced. Neri: The moral core wasn't my metaphor and I'm also not sure it is a very good one. I'll leave this discussion for those who came up with it. Neri From bboyminn at yahoo.com Wed Nov 3 02:02:51 2004 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Wed, 03 Nov 2004 02:02:51 -0000 Subject: The only one he ever feared? In-Reply-To: <97.516d2bdb.2eb96818@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117108 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, chnc1024 at A... wrote: > A thought came to me as I was reading some other posts, and > at the risk of sounding very stupid I figured I'd go ahead and > throw this on out there. > > Why is DD the only wizard Voldemort feared? > > I know that DD is an EXTREMELY powerful wizard, and I'm > sure that does have something to do with it, but Voldemort > isn't exactly weak. ...edited... > > Chancie ~ who hopes she doesn't sound as stupid as she feels! bboyminn: I think the answer is as simple as Voldemort fears Dumbledore because Dumbledore doesn't fear Voldemort. Dumbledore isn't impressed by Voldemorts stylings. He's not intimidated. He's not threatened. The old law of the jungle says that you chase anything that runs from you and run from anything that chases you. Well, the problem is that Voldemort is chasing, or at least trying, but Dumbledore isn't running. True Dumbledore fears the horrible things that Voldemort can and will do in general, but he's not personally afraid of him. Look at how confidently he face Voldemort in the atrium of the Ministry of Magic in OotP. In that scene Harry is stunned by how casually Dumbledore strolls into battle. - OotP AM HB PG 814 - Dumbledore ...continuing to walk toward Voldemort as though he had not a fear in the world, as though nothing has happened to interrupt his stroll up the hall. [Dumbledore] ...still closing in upon Voldemort and speaking as lightly as though they were discussing a matter over drinks. Harry felt scared to see him walking along, undefended, shieldless. He wanted to cry out a warning... - - end quote - - Who does the bully fear? He fears the one he can't bully and intimidate. In addition, Voldemort at a mere 70-ish is a young man compared to Dumbledore at the ripe age of +150. A man of Dumbledore's experience is not beguiled or befuddled by the follies of man. He has seen them all before. He's seen the self-appointed and usually self-serving savoirs. He met the /right/ people who see themselves as far better an dmore deserving than the lowly /others/. He seen the self-deluded megalomanical tyrants before. He's seen war. He seen self-deluded politicians like Fudge. Been there; seen that; ho hum, nothing new. He's seen it all enough times that he recognises it for what it is, sheer folly. To continue with one of the many cliches in my list, 'Tyranny is the architect of it's own doom'. Dumbledore is wise enough to know that even if a self-deluded man like Voldemort wins, ultimately he loses. I've said many times before that Voldemort has a grand vision of himself standing on a balcony looking out over the wizard world as they bow at his feet. But to run an effective functional practical government, you can't spend all you time standing on the balcony waiting for people to bow. Voldemort's world would be a world in ruin, its underpinings crumbling under the ineptitude of tyranny. Commerce and international relations destroyed, the economy in ruin. In addition, Dumbledore sees the flaw of megalomania. Voldemort's is so convinced of his own god-like superiority, that any plan he may comes up with is automatically the perfect plan by no reason other than the fact that he thought of it. And who among his flock dare point out any obvious flaw in /the perfect plan/. Only those who want to embrace pain and death. How many people here have pointed out what a hopeless villain Voldemort is? How many of his wacky, ill-conceived, poorly formed, poorly excecuted plans have we seen so far? I mean damn, hasn't this quy ever read The Evil Overlord's Handbook? So, because Dumbledore sees Voldemort for what he is, because he's not impressed or the least bit intimidated, because he sees behind Voldemort's mask where he finds a poor misguided boy name Tom, he can fight Voldemort easily without fear or emotion. Any martial arts student will tell you that your own fear and emotions are you opponents greatest weapons, and conversely, your own lack of fear and emotion, your own inner calm, is your greatest weapon. Sorry, I rambled so much, but there must be a point in there somewhere. Steve/bboyminn (was bboy_mn) From nkafkafi at yahoo.com Wed Nov 3 03:17:57 2004 From: nkafkafi at yahoo.com (nkafkafi) Date: Wed, 03 Nov 2004 03:17:57 -0000 Subject: Good moral core (Re: Dirty Harry/Clean Harry) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117109 > Alla: I think we got a little confused here or maybe it is just me. > > What do you think is the reason for Harry to choose the side of good? > > To make his choice, he must have had SOME reason, instead of just > saying I want to be good from now on. Why did he want to be good? Neri: I don't think Harry ever decided "to be good" (though perhaps Hermione did ;-) ). He just had a series of choices in his life, as we all have, and in most of them, or at least in those that mattered the most, he tried to do things right. Inside him he had his own personal reasons for each of these different choices, but if you ask about outside reasons (like "because he was loved by his parents during the first year of his life") then such reasons discount his free will. If you accept that he has free will, you must be satisfied with "because after considering the options (or not) he decided that option A was better than option B". > > Alla: > > No, he did not have to do all that and I have no sympathy whatsoever > towards the choices he made. Moreover, I have less trouble > understanding why Tom Riddle made them than why Harry did. Tom hated > his father with all his heart and perhaps his sociopathy went from > there. Neri: Once you ascribe his choices to his sociopathy or such things you discount his free will. If you think his sociophathy was so strong that he could not resist it even if he decided to, then you have to claim that he has no free will, and he should be treated like an earthquake or a virus or a similar mindless thing. I don't think this is what JKR meant, although it would make the story less complex. > Alla: > But what made Harry's free will to work that way? Neri: Again, nothing makes free will work in ANY way. If it does, then it's not free will. > Alla: >He clearly made his > choices earlier than he was eleven. Why? Neri: He made them before and he made them after. Why? Because he thought that these were the right choices. From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Wed Nov 3 03:28:31 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Wed, 03 Nov 2004 03:28:31 -0000 Subject: What can kill a wizard? (was Re: Hagrid) In-Reply-To: <20041026062739.GA80223@prophecy.dyndns.org> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117110 > On Mon, Oct 25, 2004 at 23:24:08 EDT, Carol scribbled these > curious markings (most of which I've snipped): > > another. And, yes, of course, potions are one of those ways, and > > Snape's classes, especially his lessons on anecdotes, are going to > > prove important. > > Anecdotes, eh? :) > > Neglect not, friend, thine Wolfsbane > Lest all ye shalt know is paine > > Although I don't exactly see Snape composing such a thing to remind > Lupin of what to do. Carol responds, blushing: Anecdotes? I can't believe I typed that. Antidotes, of course. (But I'd dearly love to hear a Snape anecdote, which might also be useful to Harry.) These typos can be entertaining as well. I noticed that someone else referred to the Streaking Shack. That would also be, erm, interesting to witness through Harry's POV! (BTW, anecdotes are normally prose stories, like Lockhart's supposed adventures, not rhymed couplets dispensing advice in an unidentifiable meter.) :-p!! Christopher: > On a more serious note, I've been thinking about the lethal potions > idea. We know that Harry attended Hogwarts in the 1990s. The Muggle > world at least had extensible knowledge of how to mix certain substances together to make them go boom. Surely a wizard or witch can do the same for an exploding potion? Add a little magic and you have a wizarding grenade. I'd hate to know what it'd do to your insides if you imbibed it... though I imagine that Hagrid would drink it like normal people do coffee. :) Carol again: That's an interesting idea. I do think that Crouch!Moody's supposed fear (and Moody's real fear?) of Dark Wizards easily poisoning people's drinks must have some real basis and Harry might be well-advised to find a bezoar. (Maybe that's why Aberforth, who I don't believe is really illiterate, keeps goats?) Potions is clearly an important branch of knowledge, and antidotes tie in with DADA. Surely both will play some unexpected role in the upcoming war? (Snape proves his loyalty by saving an Order member with one of his anecdotes, erm, antidotes?) Christopher: > Not that it's in a different class than what's already been listed, but you can add the knife with which Peter produced his sacrifice. I'm > fairly certain that he would have bled to death -- though that's not > quite the point that I wish to make here. If a wizard can mutilate > himself so thoroughly with a certain knife, it's logical to assume that the same implement could be used for more ... directly lethal (e.g. through the heart) actions. Carol again: Then why not Hagrid's crossbow, which some posters have assumed can't be used on wizards? And Macnair's axe (I'm trying to picture him fighting like Gimli on a battlefield). Of Godric Gryffindor's sword, which I've already noted is a Muggleish sort of a weapon for a wizard, suggesting that maybe GG was a halfblood with Muggle aristocrats on his mother's side. Wizards can survive splinching and witch burning, but evidently they can't survive a (botched) muggle execution (NHN), so maybe Muggle weapons can kill them, especially if they're enchanted Muggle artifacts (with spells of destruction written in Daeron's Runes on the hilt--oops. Wrong story.) There has to be more to WW warfare than Avada Kedavra. Carol, thanking Christopher for *knowing* that I know an anecdote from an antidote and not assigning me to write "It's 'antidote', you fool!" 500 times on parchment with a quill from Fawkes and ink from the Giant Squid From nkafkafi at yahoo.com Wed Nov 3 03:34:00 2004 From: nkafkafi at yahoo.com (nkafkafi) Date: Wed, 03 Nov 2004 03:34:00 -0000 Subject: Unreliable narrator (Was: Snape's stalling) In-Reply-To: <20041102152608.21963.qmail@web53104.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117111 > > Neri: > > > > My problem with the Snape fans is that the "subversive reading" > > (is this the term?) always seems to be in ONE direction. Somehow it > > is always to make Snape look better than what the way he comes out > > in the text, never worse. > > Magda: > On the contrary, we strive to make Snape look better than the way he > comes out in too many readers' posts, namely as someone whose entire > presence in the novels is just a combination of mean teacher/wanna-be > toad poisoner who hates Harry because he hated James. All of which > are at best superficial readings of one of JKR's greatest fictional > inventions. If anything, we're subjecting the text to a close > reading while stripping away the preconceived notions about Snape's > character and motivations. > Neri again: Erm... now I'm really baffled. You try to make Snape look better because other members make him look worse? Suppose for a moment nobody in this forum would have tried to make Snape look worse, would you also tried to make him look better then? If you'd never talked with anybody about the books and didn't hear any preconceived notions about Snape, what would you have thought about him? Neri > > __________________________________________________ > Do You Yahoo!? > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around > http://mail.yahoo.com From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Wed Nov 3 03:43:56 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Wed, 03 Nov 2004 03:43:56 -0000 Subject: Good moral core (Re: Dirty Harry/Clean Harry) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117112 > Neri: > I don't think Harry ever decided "to be good" (though perhaps Hermione > did ;-) ). Alla: Heee! Neri: He just had a series of choices in his life, as we all > have, and in most of them, or at least in those that mattered the > most, he tried to do things right. Alla: Agreed. Neri: snip. If > you accept that he has free will, you must be satisfied with "because > after considering the options (or not) he decided that option A was > better than option B". Alla: Sorry for continuing bugging, but since I am often in agreement with 95% of what you write, I want to figure out whether I am in disagreement this time or wheI am still confused.:o) I agree with you about free will, I guess I am just thinking that free will has to come from somewhere too, initially at least. OK, let me try to rephrase my question again - how does Harry KNOW which decisions are right? What helps him: higher power? generation memory? What? From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Wed Nov 3 03:48:08 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Wed, 03 Nov 2004 03:48:08 -0000 Subject: Mind-linked!Snape (Part IV: TBAY conclusion) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117113 Finwitch wrote: > I do think it [the Dark Mark] burns/hurts when > ever a DE hears the name Voldemort. An act or words to make the > person saying it to share the fear makes it stop, I think. (At least > that's what we get of Snape's reactions when Harry says it. I wonder > how Dumbledore takes that... considering how he tries to get people > speak the name. One reason why Harry is so dear to him...) > Carol responds: I'm not sure that all DEs feel pain when they hear Voldemort's name. It may be peculiar to Snape--the Dark Mark punishing him for the disloyalty it perceives in him. (It may be that a bit of Voldemort's essence enters the DE through the mark, rather like the essence of a portrait's subject entering the portrait, so that the mark is sentient to a limited degree. If so, it would sense Snape's aversion to the name and punish him for it.) At any rate, I don't think we can consider Snape's reactions as typical of all DEs, if only because he no longer is one in his own eyes or Dumbledore's. I do think, however, that all the DEs would have known from their marks that something drastic had happened to Voldemort the night of Godric's Hollow, and Snape would certainly have reported such a change to Dumbledore--very quickly, if he was teaching at Hogwarts at the time. No need for Mind-linked Snape. The Dark Mark itself would be enough. Carol From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Wed Nov 3 04:47:16 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Wed, 03 Nov 2004 04:47:16 -0000 Subject: How and when did Snape learn Occlumency ? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117114 Del wrote: > We know that Snape is a superb Occlumens now and apparently a good > Legilimens as well. But when did he learn that? And who taught him? > Could it be DD ? Would DD teach a Dark Arts kid > skills as dangerous as Occlumency and Legilimency ? Or was it LV > himself maybe ? > > 4. Did Snape learn Legilimency along with Occlumency ? If not, which > one did he learn first ? > > 5. How did Snape learn Occlumency ? Someone (Finwitch if I'm not > mistaken) pointed out that teachers often use their favourite mean of *learning* to teach. It is also common for people to teach something specific in the very same way as they were taught it. So could it be that Snape taught Harry in that weird way (making him more angry at the start of the lesson) because it was the way he learned Occlumency himself ? Carol responds: At the risk of repeating myself, I don't think we have any evidence that Snape knows Legilimency beyond the "Legilimens" spell itself. As for Occlumency, it makes most sense that he learned it to protect himself from Voldemort when he became a spy, and that Dumbledore taught him, perhaps using that very same Pensieve. I doubt very much that LV would teach a young DE to block Legilimency, his own tool (or one of them) for keeping the DEs under control. And I don't know whether Finwitch or anyone else has said this before, but I have: Snape must have taught Harry using the methods that Dumbledore used to teach him, slightly adapted to the new circumstances and his own teaching style. There would be no other way for him to teach it. He's not going to take a college course in teaching Occlumency. Teacher education is unknown in the WW. The only model he has is the person who taught him, and that is almost certainly Dumbledore, at a point when he had earned Dumbledore's trust and was placing himself in great danger. Moreover, I think there *is* no other way to teach Occlumency. You have to enter the student's mind and force him to block your intrusion using whatever natural powers he possesses. DD had those powers, so did Snape, and so, I think, did Harry. He just didn't want to use them because he wanted to finish his dream. If it hadn't been for that resistance, he might have succeeded despite his dislike of Snape. Snape tries to get Harry to see his danger, even presenting himself in the role of Voldemort to get Harry to and to fight the intrusion into his mind. He even tells him to block it the same way he blocked the Imperius Curse. He can't tell Harry to relax. Harry has to be en garde, anticipating attack and ready to resist it, and Snape, IMO, is doing his best to get Harry to see that. Those methods, almost certainly the same methods DD used to teach Snape himself, ought to have worked on a student with a natural aptitude for Occlumency. it was not the methods that were at fault but the resistance to the methods. (I'm not blaming Harry. DD didn't make clear why he had to learn Occlumency or why it had to be from Snape, and Snape couldn't tell him why he had to block the dream, so Harry accepted Sirius's view that Snape was trying to hurt him.) The methods could still work, if both Harry and Snape saw the need and were willing to work together. But just possibly Occlumency is not what Harry needs now. For Snape, if he's still a spy, it's an essential survival skill. I'm not so sure that's true for Harry, whose mind LV will now be less willing to enter thanks to the failed possession in the MoM. Maybe what Harry needs now is some form of Legilimency--entering LV's thoughts through the mind link without LV's awareness. And that subject Snape, for all his skill and cleverness, can't teach. It will have to be taught by Dumbledore if it's taught at all. Carol From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Wed Nov 3 05:03:13 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Wed, 03 Nov 2004 05:03:13 -0000 Subject: How can you kill a wizard? (Was: Hagrid) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117115 Hi! Kim (ginnysthe1) here: > > Just to clarify, I know I didn't write the portion of the other post > you included starting "Christopher's enchanted weapons..." I think > that was Carol (Justcarol?) > Carol: Carol, please. "Justcarol" is my ID, not my name. (It used to be DrCarol, but I got tired of it.) And thanks for correcting the misattribution. Carol, with apologies for the short post, but Kim did ask! From jlnbtr at yahoo.com Tue Nov 2 16:25:36 2004 From: jlnbtr at yahoo.com (Juli) Date: Tue, 2 Nov 2004 08:25:36 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: A Thought about the Secret Keeper Switch Message-ID: <20041102162536.95098.qmail@web90108.mail.scd.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 117116 Magda: > Perhaps I wasn't clear. LV would go after Peter for information about the Potters' location and for information about Sirius' hiding place (because LV would assume Sirius was the SK). Since Sirius isn't protected by a Fidelius Charm, his whereabouts could be spoken about by others. Once he had Peter in his grip, LV would find out that in fact he'd hit the jackpot because it was Peter who was the SK after all! > Juli: What I meant is that IF Peter weren't the spy the Potters' plan would have worked. That is of course asuming nobody in DD's inner circle is a spy. Everyone thinks Sirius is the SK, he goes into hidding and only the Potters know where. Now Peter becomes the SK, and because he is *not* a spy, he doesn't go straight to LV, he hides or whatever. But unfortunately that didn't happen, Peter who's been a spy for almost a year, plays it cool and is named the SK, the next moment he goes straight to LV, how proud must he felt! And just as you say Madga, LV hit the jackpot, he was just looking to find out where the secret keeper was and then going after him, I don't think he ever would have guessed the secret keeper was Peter. Juli From zacksmom3 at bellsouth.net Tue Nov 2 18:29:09 2004 From: zacksmom3 at bellsouth.net (glavgirl) Date: Tue, 02 Nov 2004 18:29:09 -0000 Subject: Draco chapter (was: What we find there) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117117 catkind wrote: > > Another wild suggestion as to how to get Draco into the book so early: Narcissa Black might feel obliged to attend Sirius' wake, at the mysterious Spinners End of course, with unwilling sprog in tow. (After all, it seems that wizard law will hand Grimmauld Place to either Narcissa or Bellatrix, if Sirius couldn't be disinherited neither can they. ) Well, it said in OOTP that Sirius was the last member of the Black family. Maybe the Sisters will have no legal rights to the house. If they do, then where will the Order move their headquarters to? Maybe that's where Spinner's End comes in to play. With that being Chapter 2 of HBP is would make sense. Maybe it's another secret house of someone in the Order. Or maybe it belonged to James' parents? Either would be probable. glavgirl From elfundeb at comcast.net Wed Nov 3 05:22:54 2004 From: elfundeb at comcast.net (elfundeb) Date: Wed, 3 Nov 2004 00:22:54 -0500 Subject: CHAPTER DISCUSSION: Chapter 30 (Grawp) Message-ID: <004901c4c165$2c90c7c0$1502a8c0@TOSHIBALAPTOP> No: HPFGUIDX 117118 The chapter opens with civil disobedience running rampant in the aftermath of Fred and George Weasley's dramatic departure from Hogwarts. Umbridge and Filch struggle unsuccessfully to remove the swamp the Twins left. The number of Skiving Snackboxes they had sold becomes apparent. A niffler appears in Umbridge's office. Things start happening to the Inquisatorial Squad. And Peeves, following the Twins' orders, gives 'em hell. While charming teacups in class, Harry, Ron and Hermione discuss whether to explain what has actually happened to Montague, who has not recovered from his sojourn in the toilet. Ron comments that he expects Molly to blame him for Fred and George's departure. When Ron and Hermione begin speculating that they may have raised the galleons to pay for premises via illegal means, Harry confesses that he funded them with his Triwizard winnings. Ron is very relieved. Hermione gives Harry questionable looks, but only nags Harry about asking Snape to resume Occlumency lessons, saying Ron told her he was muttering in his sleep. Harry lies, claiming he was exhorting Ron to reach for the Quaffle; Ron is hurt by the remark but Harry felt vindictive pleasure. In fact, Harry admits to himself that he had been "quite keen" for the dreams to continue. On the morning of the final Quidditch match, Ron is grim. As the match starts, he gives up a goal, and the Slytherins begin to sing "Weasley is our King". At that moment, Hagrid appears, black-eyed and dripping blood, and insists that Harry and Hermione leave while everyone else is paying attention. They follow Hagrid into the Forbidden Forest. As they walk Hagrid tells them that Firenze had been attacked by the other centaurs after he agreed to teach Divination at Hogwarts, and that Hagrid had stopped it. Hagrid finally stops in front of an enormous sleeping creature. Hagrid explains that the creature is his half-brother Grawp, and asks Harry and Hermione to help teach him in the event Hagrid is sacked. They reluctantly agree. When Hagrid wakes Grawp up, he acts wildly and takes another swipe at Hagrid's nose. On the way out of the Forbidden Forest, they encounter a group of centaurs. They threaten Hagrid for having protected Firenze (whom they call a traitor). They let him go, however, because 'foals' Harry and Hermione are with him. As they approach the castle, they hear cheering as the throngs return from the Quidditch match. They hear "Weasley Is Our King" and realize that the Gryffindors are doing the singing - with new words, then see Ron being carried to the castle on many shoulders. ************ Questions for Discussion 1. Why do you think Filch supports Umbridge so strongly? And why does Peeves support the opposite side? 2. How do you react to Montague's failure to recover? Is it disconcerting, or just a bit of scatological/cartoon humor (it does involve a toilet, after all)? What about the contrasting attitudes of Ron and Hermione? Which view, if any, does JKR endorse? Why? 3. Why would Molly blame Ron for the Twins' departure? Do you think this is indicative of Molly's actual views, does it reflect Ron's own stress about his mother's expectations, or something else? 4. Hagrid says if he is sacked, he could be useful to the Order and Grubbly-Plank would get them through their exams. What do you think Hagrid's role for the order would be? What about Hagrid as a teacher? Is his statement a veiled comment about his own competence? And would hiding a giant in the forest be a serious offense if Umbridge wasn't in charge? 5. Hagrid calls Grawp "harmless" even though Grawp caused Hagrid's injuries. He needs to be tied down. Harry doubts he could ever be permitted to mingle with humans. Is this a signal to reassess Hermione's conclusion in GoF that wizarding attitudes toward giants is "just prejudice"? Do Grawp's circumstances cause or contribute to his wildness? 6. We also learn more about the centaurs. What do their attempt to ban Hagrid from the Forbidden Forest and their willingness to use violence tell us about them? Do the centaurs fit into the prejudice theme? If so, how? 7. Why does the crowd annoint Ron as the hero of the Quidditch match? Ginny is conspicuously absent. Didn't she catch the snitch? Debbie NOTE: For more information on HPfGU's chapter discussions, please see http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/67817 and http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/85829 as well as "OotP Chapter Discussions" at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/database [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From jlnbtr at yahoo.com Wed Nov 3 02:33:49 2004 From: jlnbtr at yahoo.com (jlnbtr) Date: Wed, 03 Nov 2004 02:33:49 -0000 Subject: The only one he ever feared? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117119 > chancie wrote: > > Why is DD the only wizard Voldemort feared? > > > > I know that DD is an EXTREMELY powerful wizard, and I'm > > sure that does have something to do with it, but Voldemort > > isn't exactly weak. Is there something that DD knows or has > > done to make Voldemort truly fearful of him? If Voldemort > > knows about the prophecy (and we all know that he defiantly > > does, or he wouldn't have tried to kill Harry to begin with) > > that Trelawney made, then why isn't Harry the one he fears? > > It seems to me that since Harry is the one who all but killed > > him at GH, and DD (as far as I know) hasn't been able to hurt > > Voldemort in any way does he only fear DD? > > Juli: What I'm thinking is WHY would a grown wizard fear a one year old baby? profecy or not, what could he do? Harry didn't defeat or whatever LV the first time, it was Lily, she's the one that left that ancient magic that made de AK backfire. LV doesn't know the whole profecy, he just heard the first sentence (the one with the power to defeat the Dark Lord will be born as the 7th month ends). Sure he must fear Harry, but only because the prophecy. Harry's never been an extremely good wizard, he's good, nor excellent. Dumbledore on the other hand is *the best wizard of our times*, he knows black magic (although he's too noble to use it), maybe even more than LV, plus he knows white magic a LOT (which I doubt LV really knows). So he's extremly powerful, he knows everyone, he's got connections, he's the Wizenmagot's chief, he usually knows what LV is up to, could have been MoM. Am I forgetting something? Of course he's feared, I would fear him too!! Besides, DD was fighting LV long before Harry was born. So maybe he can't kill LV, but he sure can hurt him, and they can duel (when LV duels, he just goes AK, nobody has time to answer), DD could probably leave him tied up or something until Harry was able to vanquish him for good. Juli From kelsey_dangelo at yahoo.com Wed Nov 3 05:19:36 2004 From: kelsey_dangelo at yahoo.com (Kelsey Dangelo) Date: Tue, 2 Nov 2004 21:19:36 -0800 (PST) Subject: Good moral core (Re: Dirty Harry/Clean Harry) In-Reply-To: <1099401523.50325.42547.m12@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <20041103051936.84395.qmail@web53101.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 117120 Kelsey wrote: "...the parallels between Voldemort and Harry (their connection and similarities in situations, their connection to 'Slytherin traits')..." Del wrote : < Why does Harry have this ultra-good core and not LV? Were they born that way or did they acquire their cores while growing-up?>> Kelsey replies: OOO! Excellent question, and one that I have no answer what-so-ever for! Ha! Here's an attempt. I think it is something "in born" or individual, or unique to the person or character. Obviously, Harry and Voldie are not real people (they are characters that are polar opposites for literary, symbolic, and artistic reasons). I think it comes back to Dumbledore' infamous "choices". Voldie and Harry have so many of the same situations, and yet, they react to them so very differently because of the choices they makes. Of course, these choices are based on some internal moral core, soul, spirit, character, whatever-you-call-it. So I think it is a combination of both that they were born with it and it developed as they grew up. Nature and Nurture. Of course, in the RW, people often react differently. For instance, I had a horrible experience in a class in high school (the teacher was oppressive and mean to those who were not capable). While my friend quit the class for her own sanity, I fought it out and tried to change the teacher's opinion. People just react differently to different situations and I think that is governed by and governs who they are. So, how both Harry and Voldie reacted to being oppressed and neglected children was very different. It was governed by their internal and external atmospheres. Both their natures and nurtures. Kelsey, who's still thinks of that teacher with fear. __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com From gbannister10 at aol.com Wed Nov 3 08:07:18 2004 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Wed, 03 Nov 2004 08:07:18 -0000 Subject: Good moral core (Re: Dirty Harry/Clean Harry) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117121 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "dumbledore11214" wrote: Alla: > I agree with you about free will, I guess I am just thinking that > free will has to come from somewhere too, initially at least. > > OK, let me try to rephrase my question again - how does Harry KNOW > which decisions are right? What helps him: higher power? generation > memory? What? Geoff: Enlarging a bit on what I said in messages 117060/117100, I believe, from my own personal standpoint as a Christian, that we were created with the ability to recognise that there are certain moral absolutes. We, as individuals with free will, can choose to accept those or fly in the face of them. Some of us may have more of an initial disposition to lean to one side or the other. However, some folk may start to go against those "good" choices for one reason or another - some of which may appear to be perfectly valid - and find themselves on a slippery slope where their sense of right and wrong becomes blunted and numbed because they have continually overriden their consciences. In message 117108, Steve wrote: "I've said many times before that Voldemort has a grand vision of himself standing on a balcony looking out over the wizard world as they bow at his feet. But to run an effective functional practical government, you can't spend all you time standing on the balcony waiting for people to bow. Voldemort's world would be a world in ruin, its underpinings crumbling under the ineptitude of tyranny. Commerce and international relations destroyed, the economy in ruin." My immediate mental picture was of Saruman in LOTR - it was the balcony that did it(!). He initially tried to serve Middle-Earth in good faith but then by doing things which ran counter to what folk would have thought good. As a result, he became corrupted by power and enmeshed in his own plans; so he turned into a tyrant and fell into the kind of traps which Steve outlined above. The interesting thing to know would be when and where Tom Riddle reached the point where, having begun to go against what we would consider to be good in small things, he began to "actively" seek the bad and to seek the self-aggrandisment which he seemed to be following when we see him as a diary memory in COS. Geoff http://www.aspectsofexmoor.com From bboyminn at yahoo.com Wed Nov 3 09:54:56 2004 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Wed, 03 Nov 2004 09:54:56 -0000 Subject: Unreliable narrator - The Snape Timeline In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117123 Someone did an excellent analysis of the timeline on the night that Harry and friend flew off to the Ministry to rescue Sirius. That link was reference earlier in this thread. The basic analysis of sunrise, sunset, and twilight have led to the conclusion that we are dealing with a 5 hour timespan between when Harry enters the forest and when the Order members rescue him. (approx 8pm to 1am) Some seem to think that this is an unreasonably long period of time, and therefore implies some grand conspiracy or neglegence on Snape's part. However, as much as I am not a Snape Apologist, I don't see the timeline as that far fetched. First, while we are tracking Harry movements and know what is going on, Snape does not have this knowledge. Once the leaves Umbridge's office, all he knows is that Harry has been breaking school rules again, gotten caught, and Harry seems to be under the unlikely belief that Voldemort has Sirius in the Ministry of Magic. Something that would be extremely difficult for anyone to believe. But just in case, Snape contacts Grimmauld Place and discovers Sirius is safe and sound, in his mind, case closed. So what does Snape do? He goes to his office, makes a nice cup of tea, and sits back sipping it, savoring all the deliciously nasty things Umbridge is likely to do to Harry and friends, all the while thinking that the little brat deserves it for all the rules he breaks. About time some one took him to task for this. Umbridge has Harry, Sirius is safe, certainly no need for panic and indeed not even any real need to be concerned. Although, I'm sure Snape is unaware of the depths to which Umbridge would stoop. An hour to a couple hours go by, and Snape finds out that Umbridge has taken Harry and Hermione into the forest, and that some time after that, Ron and Co manager to escape from Draco, and gone into (most likely) the forest after them. I suspect he finds this out all at once after the fact. Draco probably came running to Snape so he could whine and cry on his shoulder. (Once he recovered from the Curse of the Bat Bogies that is.) Certainly, at time for concern, but still no reason to panic. Harry and Hermione are afteral in the company of an armed adult witch. The situation could be unpleasant, but mostly for Harry at the hands of Umbridge, so again, no reason for Snape to panic. Nothing to do but wait for them to return, and fantasize about how many detentions Harry will get for this little mess, or hopefully, expelled. Now another two hours goes by, and Snape is probably becoming seriously concerned, but Umbridge is with them in the forest, and even she wouldn't be stupid enough to wander too deeply into danger. (Little does he know.) Eventually, he starts to think that perhaps Harry found a way to get to London. But how? There are not likely to be any Floo powered fires in the forest. He can't apparate. They might have sneaked back to the school and taken a couple of brooms from the Quidditch Broom Cupboard. But even at 100mph, assuming they could withstand the cold for that long, it would take them over four hours to get to London by broom. Now it's getting in the vicinity of midnight, plus or minus, and Snape decides to tell the Order that Harry may still be attempting to get to London. Again, cause for concern, but not necessarily panic. It's a long trip from Hogwarts to London. At this time maybe Snape searches the forest, maybe he didn't, doesn't matter because it doesn't affect the timeline; that's been transfered to the Order. The Order thinks on the possibilities for a while, and decides that perhaps, it might be best to check things out. Sounds simple, but under normal circumstances there should be a night guard at the Ministry, and they need a good cover story for why a half a dozen of them are barging in there in the middle of the night. Naturally, they can't take Sirius with them, it going to be hard enough explaining to the guard, or anyone else, why they are there without have to explain Sirius's presents too. Eventually, they can't delay any longer, and right on the timeline, they appear at the Ministry, soon followed by Sirius, who took an unbelievable risk going to the Ministry. Now all they have to do is find Harry. Logically, he is most likely in the Dept of Mysteries, but where, it's a big place. Eventually the whole Order crew is standing in the circular room wondering which door to pick. I would suspect they would try and go to the Hall of Prophecies first, where they would find evidence of mayhem and distruction. Where to next? Well, at this time, Harry is having a quiet conversation with Lucius in the Death Chamber; not scuffling or fighting at this point. Difficult for the Order to hear them. Eventualy, right on time according to the timeline, they burst into the Death Chamber and to the rescue. It's important to put yourself outside the situation. We, as readers, have great knowledge of what is actualy going on, but Snape and the Order know nothing other than Umbridge took Harry and Hermione into the forest on some unlikely and ill-conceived mission; commonly referred to in the muggle world as a Wild Goose Chase. That's not much to go on. Snape, given his lack of knowledge of the real events, has no reason to panic or do anything other that wait for Harry to come back to the castle. You can read it how you want, but that timeline fits as far as I can see. Steve/bboyminn (was bboy_mn) From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com Wed Nov 3 10:32:09 2004 From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (arrowsmithbt) Date: Wed, 03 Nov 2004 10:32:09 -0000 Subject: Was Harry designed as the Anti-LV weapon ? In-Reply-To: <12d.4e6ecb55.2eb94aff@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117124 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, chnc1024 at A... wrote: > In a message dated 11/2/2004 12:34:36 PM Pacific Standard Time, > arrowsmithbt at b... writes: > Meanwhile DD arranges for him to have extremely useful extra lessons > (not given to *any* other student - Patronus! and Occlumency) without > bothering to give him the whole story. > ************************************************************************* > > Chancie: > While I can see your point in Occlumency, do we know that DD had > Lupin teach Harry "Expecto Patronum"? I was under the impression > that Lupin taught Harry that on his own to help Harry, Unlike the > ordered lessons Snape gave. Then again I could be wrong! > > Chancie~who definatly knows that if she is wrong, it wouldn't > be the first time (or the last for that matter!) Who cares about being wrong? Not I - and nobody else should either. But - the Patronus. Dementors camped outside the school gates, on the Express - all because Black had escaped *before* term started and was expected to turn up at Hogwarts. No co-incidence then that a friend of Harry's parents who was also a friend of Sirius' turns up as DADA (a post notoriously difficult to fill) by a prof. who owes DD a *big* favour - DD kept his condition a secret when he was a student and keeps it a secret now. Originally I think this was because Lupin was probably the one person who was acceptable to, could talk to, all parties without getting zapped on sight. Of course after the episode on the train and the obvious and exaggerated effect of Dementors on Harry, he became very useful as a 'trainer' too. DD obviously knew what was going on with the Patronus classes otherwise he would have been crazy to give Harry the Timeturner to enable him to go back and save himself. Even if DD didn't arrange for Harry to have the classes, he knew about them and said nothing. And by the traditions of the Common Law "silence gives consent". Some may say that I'm stretching a bit from there to 'arranging' classes - but I have a very high regard for DD's sneakiness. Kneasy From finwitch at yahoo.com Wed Nov 3 12:24:57 2004 From: finwitch at yahoo.com (finwitch) Date: Wed, 03 Nov 2004 12:24:57 -0000 Subject: Animagus properties, In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117125 > Kim now: > > In any case, to summarize what seems to be true about Animagi, yes, I > agree with you, they seem to correspond to the personality traits of > the wizard: Rita's a beetle, Peter's a rat, Sirius is a big black > dog, James is a stag, McGonagall's a cat -- is that the full list of > Animagi as we know it so far from canon? Those animals all seem to > imply the personality type of the witch or wizard. It would be nice > though to expound a little on why specifically a beetle fits Rita > Skeeter, a stag James, a cat McGonagall, etc. -- any takers?? It > also seems to be true on reflection, that so far Animagi animals > aren't "magical" or "WW-only" animals, such as dragons or blast- ended > skrewts -- none that we know of anyhow. Finwitch: Well, what little I know of rats: Survivor. Most important thing to a rat is to stay alive. (Rats leaving sinking ship, escaping flood etc.) They're very good at that, too. At a point of time, Black Rats were carriers of a flea causing a plague known as Black Death, due to high death-rate. Thus rat might be seen as bringer of death at high rates. And how does this apply to Peter Pettigrew: 1) He _does_ care most about his own survival. The scene in PoA shows this most clearly. 2) Death-bringer. I suppose raising Voldemort in GoF appoints to this, as well as killing those 12 Muggles... He brings death. Dog: Loyalty. Pack is more important than individual's survival. A well-treated dog eagerly obeys those above him in the pack; if mistreated by the pack, the dog is likely to leave. And, no dog likes to be isolated from the pack. Playful. Dogs want to play, serve etc. they won't take to boredom - they'll start barking. And they definately don't like indoors. In a full-canine pack, all adults care for the puppies. Of course, they also defend their territory etc. (And, while wolf isn't exactly a dog, it's close enough. In a wolf- pack, only the leading couple mates). Sirius: Well, isn't all this obvious? He DOES seek company most of all - he left his mistreating family to join James' family - he stays because he was told to, but eagerly waits for opportunity to serve his pack. He's immediately taking care of Harry (puppy of the pack), barks at 12 Grimmauld Place etc. And in the times Sirius was in school, James was the pack-leader, Sirius his second. Supposedly Remus was third, and Peter the lowest. I suppose Remus does have some canine traits as well - and his pack was the friends he had chosen for himself, friends who took all this animagi-trouble for him. (Mind you, I think that if Remus were not werewolf but animagus, his animagus-form WOULD be wolf). And in wolves, loyalty to the pack is even stronger than in dogs, as well as seeking approval of the pack- leader... Stag: Well... Prongs - or horns - is the crown an adult/puberty male has. They'll fight threats or other males by clacking horns together (even to death, sometimes) unless the other submits. They also chase after the females. Not that we know much of James, well - he DOES "clang horns" in two-male fight with Severus, he chased after Lily (took her lead into goodness--) and James WAS proud of his hair... Also, vegerarian, and prey to humans. Dunno about McGonagall & cat, I'm allergic so I can't really observe cats... And beetles- annoyoing buzz is what comes to my mind. (I doubt JKR meant any reference to a band called the Beatles). Kim: > Then we're still not sure if Dumbledore's an Animagus or not (is he a > bumblebee as his name implies or some other bug? Other posters, > myself included, have discussed DD's Animagus in recent past posts); > and we can't say Lupin's inner self is a werewolf since Lupin isn't > actually an Animagus. Finwitch: Well, bees - mainly the males stay in the hive, while the sterile female workers do all the work, and the Queen-bee lays eggs... All of them like sweets... and after the males do fertilise the Princess (specially treated female, that's fertile and will start a new hive) they die, because the workers won't have such useless beings in... How about Demiguise? Would sure explain ability to become invisible, but of course, invisibility may well be gained by many other means. Kim: > It's also been suggested by someone on the list (whose name escapes > me), and I concur, that Fawkes may be the Animagus of Godric > Gryffindor (or did I suggest that? Yep, I think it was me). > Actually I think the other poster suggested that if Harry does turn > out to have an Animagus, that it might be a Phoenix. Finwitch: Well, I've speculated that Harry could become a phoenix-animagus. Still, NOW I think that Harry's a metamorphmagus who might become a phoenix upon taking a killing curse in order to save his friend. While Harry's mother did it out of love and parental protection, Harry would do it out of *loyalty*. Remember how Dumbledore emphasised how phoenixes make very _faithful_ pets. Note that as I see it, becoming a phoenix in this fashion is NOT becoming an animagus (which JKR said is very difficult to do, and Harry doesn't really have that much time). It's becoming a phoenix. After all, the most noteable thing about a phoenix is their ability to die and be reborn out of ashes, thus being truly immortal. It's possible that after becoming a phoenix, before the second burning - a person about to be a phoenix would turn into a phoenix upon feelings of loyalty. After the second burning, however, the human-side is gone, and only the faithful phoenix will remain. I mean really, why would an IMMORTAL being be so rare? If they're all infertile, where did all the phoenixes come from? But if a phoenix must be a result of a wizard/witch dying out of loyalty (and properly dying at that, no going back), particularly if the said wiz. must also be able to transform oneself at time of death (either as metamorphmagus or as animagus), well... Speaking of that, we'll see if Sirius will return as a phoenix. After all, his loyalty to Harry (and loyalty is ALSO a dog-characteristic) may well see to his transformation. Finwitch From finwitch at yahoo.com Wed Nov 3 13:25:17 2004 From: finwitch at yahoo.com (finwitch) Date: Wed, 03 Nov 2004 13:25:17 -0000 Subject: Totally Obssessed - Found It! - Spinners End - Near BRISTOL! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117126 "Steve": > > I found it, I found a street called Spinners End, and it's just south > west of BRISTOL near Weston-Super-Mare. > > To find it on a map go to this first link which is a list of streets > in the BS22 postal code. > > http://www.proviser.com/regional/postcodes/bs22/street_maps/alpha_s.ht ml > > Then scroll down to - > > SPINNERS END (BS22 7HJ) > > OR (same link) > > http://www.multimap.com/map/browse.cgi? scale=10000&pc=bs227hj&title=Street+index+for+BS22+PROVISER&cat=loc > > and select the link. That will take you to www.MultiMaps.com and show > you the close up location of the exact street. > > Now /Zoom/ back until you get a larger overview of the area. Zoom > 1:2000000 (1:2,000,000) works good. Finwitch: That's a great one! You see the Spinners End only at closest Zoom. Now, getting a bit larger view, I found some other interesting place- names. Wick St Lawrence, West Wick and Way Wick. (Why do these remind me of Flit*wick*?) Particularly looking at the overall map once we find where Spinners End and Surrey are... Flight over Bristol is quite direct, really. No wonder it took Hagrid all day if that's where Harry used to live. It's quite a long way, after all. (And I suppose Hagrid had to land every now and then to feed Harry..) Only trouble about this is: How's Harry going there as he leaves Dursleys? Portkey? Finwitch From finwitch at yahoo.com Wed Nov 3 13:46:03 2004 From: finwitch at yahoo.com (finwitch) Date: Wed, 03 Nov 2004 13:46:03 -0000 Subject: Was Harry designed as the Anti-LV weapon ? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117127 > > Neri: ... when Umbridge inspect > Trelawney in the beginning of the OotP school year (that is, only 2 > months after Harry's 15th birthday) Trelawney says she had her job for > "nearly 16 years". This suggests that she was hired by DD during the > end of 1979 or the beginning of 1980. This means that prohecy was > actually told about the same time that Harry and Neville were > conceived. It could be shortly after that or shortly before that. > > However, since a prophecy is by definition somewhat deterministic, I'm > not sure that all these coincidences necessarily support your theory. > That is, maybe they happened because they were fated to happen that > way, rather then because DD arranged them to happen. I wrote here > before that sometime it is difficult to distinguish between > Puppetmaster!JKR and Puppetmaster!DD. Finwitch: It could very well be exactly as the two were concieved -- at any case, I think we'll never know. Wonder what was happening when Trelawney made her *second* prophecy, predicting (as it seems to be) the escape and intent of Wormtail. WHAT made that thing so certain at that time. Did Lupin mess with his Wolfsbane Potion? As I see it, a true prophecy is triggered by an event which makes the content happen, no matter what. We know Harry had just said that Buckbeak would fly free, and INSISTED on it. I wonder - how did Trelawney rate Harry's prediction when Buckbeak escaped? (Still, at OWLs, that PAST-prediction - IF the examiner had been in mortal danger that day - Harry may well have got a good mark!) Finwitch From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com Wed Nov 3 13:51:32 2004 From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (arrowsmithbt) Date: Wed, 03 Nov 2004 13:51:32 -0000 Subject: Totally Obssessed - Found It! - Spinners End - Near BRISTOL! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117128 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Geoff Bannister" wrote: > > Geoff: > There have been suggestions in the past that Godric's Hollow was in > Wales. > > I've never followed that up but a track from most areas of Wales to > Surrey could easily pass over Bristol. > If it's supposed to have some association with G.G. that might cause a bit of a problem. His name is Anglo-Saxon and the Sorting Hat states (in GoF): "Bold Gryffindor from wild moor..." Wales has a bit of a shortage of wild moors; in fact I can't think of any in the Principality. I'd have thought it more likely he was from your neck of the woods - what with Dart-, Ex-, Bodmin, it seems like you've got a surfeit of 'em. Start a Gift Shoppe and Tea Room immediately. I'll be happy taking 5%. Kneasy From gbannister10 at aol.com Wed Nov 3 13:55:47 2004 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Wed, 03 Nov 2004 13:55:47 -0000 Subject: Totally Obssessed - Found It! - Spinners End - Near BRISTOL! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117129 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "finwitch" wrote: Finwitch: > Particularly looking at the overall map once we find where Spinners > End and Surrey are... Flight over Bristol is quite direct, really. No > wonder it took Hagrid all day if that's where Harry used to live. > It's quite a long way, after all. (And I suppose Hagrid had to land > every now and then to feed Harry..) Geoff: I'm sorry keep banging away about this but I haven't really had a sensible reply from anyone. Why are we considering Hagrid making a journey from Spinners End to Surrey with baby Harry? The Potters were living in Godric's Hollow; some folk argue that this is in Wales. So what's Spinners End go to do with this? I've also said that to fly directly from the northern outskirts of Weston-super-Mare to Surrey would involve flying south of Bristol. Geoff http://www.aspectsofexmoor.com From gbannister10 at aol.com Wed Nov 3 14:01:19 2004 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Wed, 03 Nov 2004 14:01:19 -0000 Subject: Totally Obssessed - Found It! - Spinners End - Near BRISTOL! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117130 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "arrowsmithbt" wrote: Kneasy: > If it's supposed to have some association with G.G. that might cause > a bit of a problem. > His name is Anglo-Saxon and the Sorting Hat states (in GoF): > > "Bold Gryffindor from wild moor..." > > Wales has a bit of a shortage of wild moors; in fact I can't think > of any in the Principality. > I'd have thought it more likely he was from your neck of the woods - > what with Dart-, Ex-, Bodmin, it seems like you've got a surfeit of 'em. > > Start a Gift Shoppe and Tea Room immediately. > I'll be happy taking 5%. Geoff: I presume your thoughts about moors are re Godric's Hollow and not Spider's Terminus. There are areas of Wales which could be described as "moor" without actually carrying the name; for example, some of the scenery in the Brecon Beacons north of Crickhowell (or Crug Hywel if you prefer) is reminiscent of parts of Exmoor. I will give your suggestion some thought. :-) Geoff http://www.aspectsofexmoor.com From spotthedungbeetle at hotmail.com Wed Nov 3 14:38:05 2004 From: spotthedungbeetle at hotmail.com (dungrollin) Date: Wed, 03 Nov 2004 14:38:05 -0000 Subject: Totally Obssessed - Found It! - Spinners End - Near BRISTOL! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117131 > Geoff: > I'm sorry keep banging away about this but I haven't really had a > sensible reply from anyone. > > Why are we considering Hagrid making a journey from Spinners End > to Surrey with baby Harry? > > The Potters were living in Godric's Hollow; some folk argue that > this is in Wales. So what's Spinners End go to do with this? > > I've also said that to fly directly from the northern outskirts of > Weston-super-Mare to Surrey would involve flying south of Bristol. Dungrollin: It was suggested that Spinners End was where Hagrid took Harry for the missing 24 hours after LV attacked GH, so he'd have come from Spinners End to get to Little Whinging. It was suggested that GH was in Wales because you'd have to fly over Bristol to get to Surrey; but if Hagrid took Harry to Spinners End for the day before going to Little Whinging, Spinners End would (/could) be in Wales, and GH could be anywhere. If Spinners End *is* a place, and if the missing 24 hours *isn't* a flint, and if if if... From mimbeltonia at yahoo.com Wed Nov 3 13:04:41 2004 From: mimbeltonia at yahoo.com (mimbeltonia) Date: Wed, 03 Nov 2004 13:04:41 -0000 Subject: Animagus properties, In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117132 snipping quite heavily here: > Kim: > > It's also been suggested by someone on the list (whose name escapes > > me), and I concur, that Fawkes may be the Animagus of Godric > > Gryffindor (or did I suggest that? Yep, I think it was me). > > Actually I think the other poster suggested that if Harry does turn > > out to have an Animagus, that it might be a Phoenix. > > Finwitch: > > Well, I've speculated that Harry could become a phoenix-animagus. > Still, NOW I think that Harry's a metamorphmagus who might become a > phoenix upon taking a killing curse in order to save his friend. > Mimbeltonia's comment: On March 4th in chat, JKR answered a question about animagi: "class 14: If you were a animagus which animal would you be? and why? JKR: I gave Hermione my ideal animagus, because it's my favourite animal. You'll find the answer in the Room of Requirement, Order of the Phoenix!" So apparently Hermione's animagus is an otter, just like her patronus. (Or JKR meant to say Patronus, and mixed things up...) On several other occasions, she states that Harry will NOT become an animagus. I therefore don't think that the Phoenix-animagus, however lovely an idea, is very likely. Any thoughts on how an otter fits Hermione's personality?? From cat_kind at yahoo.com Wed Nov 3 14:03:54 2004 From: cat_kind at yahoo.com (cat_kind) Date: Wed, 03 Nov 2004 14:03:54 -0000 Subject: Totally Obssessed - Found It! - Spinners End - Near BRISTOL! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117134 > Geoff: > I'm sorry keep banging away about this but I haven't really had a > sensible reply from anyone. > > Why are we considering Hagrid making a journey from Spinners End to > Surrey with baby Harry? > > The Potters were living in Godric's Hollow; some folk argue that this > is in Wales. So what's Spinners End go to do with this? > > I've also said that to fly directly from the northern outskirts of > Weston-super-Mare to Surrey would involve flying south of Bristol. catkind: I think the point is, Hagrid doesn't seem to turn up in Surrey until midnight of 1st November, but he collected Harry the previous night. So Hagrid has to go somewhere with Harry for a day, and that's where Spinners End might come in. Alternatively, both Godric's Hollow and Spinners End could be either houses or streets or villages. What's to say one isn't contained in the other. catkind From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Wed Nov 3 16:11:25 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Wed, 03 Nov 2004 16:11:25 -0000 Subject: Good moral core (Re: Dirty Harry/Clean Harry) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117135 Del: > > Similarly, I get the feeling that Harry was born to be good, he > > was born to be LV's nemesis. Right from the beginning of PS/SS, > > we see him doing good things, but we're rarely told *why* he > > makes good choices. Even when he befriends Ron, it reads as > > though he first did what was right, and then he discovered that > > it feels good. Harry systematically makes the good choices, but > > we don't know *why*. We rarely see him considering the > > alternative and then basing his decision on precise reasons or > > beliefs. It always goes back to "this is the right thing to > > do". But why ?? Neri: > Harry is almost by definition the good hero, so yes, I think he has > the talent for making the right choices most of the time. Still, I > find it instructive that the prophecy doesn't say who will win. It > says Harry has THE POWER to vanquish the Dark Lord, but it doesn't > promise us that Harry will use this power. Free will again. > > Why did Harry befriend Ron rather than Draco in SS/PS? Well, I > thought when reading it that the choice was pretty obvious. Ron was > nice to him. Draco reminded him of Dudley. Harry also refused to go > to Slytherin, in part, because Hagrid told him that Voldemort was in > Slytherin, and Hafrid was nice to him too. I think that these were > very good reasons for a 11 yrs old, and even for older people. If > you don't have a lot of information, going with the nice people is a > better bet than going with the nasty people (hey, I just realized > this is what JKR said about men ;-) ). If later it turned out you > made the wrong choice, this is why we have second chances. SSSusan: Though I'm not sure you're going to be satisfied with this answer, Del, I do think you hit on it when you said "it felt good." It *felt* like the right thing to do once he'd "chosen" Ron over Draco. Ron was fun, Ron was nice, it felt like the right thing to do. Similarly, Harry had never had any money before. He finds he has a vault-full and he uses some of it to buy treats to share w/ Ron on the Hogwarts Express. It *felt* GOOD, we're told. It *felt* RIGHT. There's your reinforcement. And that doesn't seem hard to understand or believe, for me. I think of my dad. *His* dad was an alcoholic who wasted his sporadic paychecks on booze, leaving his wife to raise of family of 6 kids pretty much on her own. WHY did my dad then choose to not hang out in bars, neglecting his family? WHY did he not give in to poverty and being uneducated? He got himself a Ph.D. and taught college physics. He built a stable marriage & family and drinks responsibly. Some people JUST DO this. Rather than (understandably) giving in to their circumstances as many do, some **identify** with others outside their circumstances and fight the circumstances. Harry may have been one of those kids who, having nothing & being bullied, rather than succumbing simply chose to try to be different. And when it FELT GOOD, he knew it was the right course. It's not THAT uncommon, nor do I find it to be unbelievable. Siriusly Snapey Susan From dk59us at yahoo.com Wed Nov 3 16:29:58 2004 From: dk59us at yahoo.com (Eustace_Scrubb) Date: Wed, 03 Nov 2004 16:29:58 -0000 Subject: The only one he ever feared? In-Reply-To: <97.516d2bdb.2eb96818@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117136 Chancie wrote: > A thought came to me as I was reading some other posts, and > at the risk of sounding very stupid I figured I'd go ahead and > throw this on out there. > > Why is DD the only wizard Voldemort feared? Eustace_Scrubb: Great question, don't worry... In addition to what others have said: 1) Voldemort believes Dumbledore has been "onto him" at least since Tom Riddle's fifth year at Hogwarts. Dumbledore is one of the few people who know that Tom Riddle transformed himself into Voldemort. Voldemort probably either knows or suspects that Dumbledore knows more about Tom Riddle's history than anyone else (maybe even more than Voldemort knows himself). 2) Dumbledore defeated Voldemort's "predecessor," Grindelwald. 3) Voldemort knows that Dumbledore knows more about Harry (via the prophecy) than Voldemort does. 4) Voldemort believes that Harry is the one with power to vanquish the Dark Lord--even if he still doesn't know the whole prophecy--and he probably believes that Harry can only develop his powers fully under Dumbledore's guidance. My 4 cents, Cheers, Eustace_Scrubb "Not useless," said the Owl. "Eustace!" From prongs at marauders-map.net Wed Nov 3 16:34:39 2004 From: prongs at marauders-map.net (Silver Stag) Date: Wed, 3 Nov 2004 11:34:39 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] CHAPTER DISCUSSION: Chapter 30 (Grawp) References: <004901c4c165$2c90c7c0$1502a8c0@TOSHIBALAPTOP> Message-ID: <025901c4c1c3$064f72b0$0201a8c0@bettysue> No: HPFGUIDX 117137 Debbie wrote: 7. Why does the crowd annoint Ron as the hero of the Quidditch match? Ginny is conspicuously absent. Didn't she catch the snitch? She did, but Ron had been having trouble all year. To hear them talk, he hadn't saved a goal all ear. To see him do well after all his struggles and overcome his confidence issues on the field... Yes, Ginny caught the snitch, but Ron's transformation from fumbling and lunging keeper with no confidence to competent was a relief. He needed the reinforcement, I suppose. The quidditch fanatic in me is extremely upset with Hagrid for pulling us away from Ron's triumph. I wish I'd seen the match. Betty, who feels she was just rambling away and didn't answer very well '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: "elfundeb" To: Sent: Wednesday, November 03, 2004 12:22 AM Subject: [HPforGrownups] CHAPTER DISCUSSION: Chapter 30 (Grawp) > > The chapter opens with civil disobedience running rampant in the aftermath of Fred and George Weasley's dramatic departure from Hogwarts. Umbridge and Filch struggle unsuccessfully to remove the swamp the Twins left. The number of Skiving Snackboxes they had sold becomes apparent. A niffler appears in Umbridge's office. Things start happening to the Inquisatorial Squad. And Peeves, following the Twins' orders, gives 'em hell. > > While charming teacups in class, Harry, Ron and Hermione discuss whether to explain what has actually happened to Montague, who has not recovered from his sojourn in the toilet. Ron comments that he expects Molly to blame him for Fred and George's departure. When Ron and Hermione begin speculating that they may have raised the galleons to pay for premises via illegal means, Harry confesses that he funded them with his Triwizard winnings. Ron is very relieved. Hermione gives Harry questionable looks, but only nags Harry about asking Snape to resume Occlumency lessons, saying Ron told her he was muttering in his sleep. Harry lies, claiming he was exhorting Ron to reach for the Quaffle; Ron is hurt by the remark but Harry felt vindictive pleasure. In fact, Harry admits to himself that he had been "quite keen" for the dreams to continue. > > On the morning of the final Quidditch match, Ron is grim. As the match starts, he gives up a goal, and the Slytherins begin to sing "Weasley is our King". At that moment, Hagrid appears, black-eyed and dripping blood, and insists that Harry and Hermione leave while everyone else is paying attention. They follow Hagrid into the Forbidden Forest. As they walk Hagrid tells them that Firenze had been attacked by the other centaurs after he agreed to teach Divination at Hogwarts, and that Hagrid had stopped it. Hagrid finally stops in front of an enormous sleeping creature. Hagrid explains that the creature is his half-brother Grawp, and asks Harry and Hermione to help teach him in the event Hagrid is sacked. They reluctantly agree. When Hagrid wakes Grawp up, he acts wildly and takes another swipe at Hagrid's nose. > > On the way out of the Forbidden Forest, they encounter a group of centaurs. They threaten Hagrid for having protected Firenze (whom they call a traitor). They let him go, however, because 'foals' Harry and Hermione are with him. As they approach the castle, they hear cheering as the throngs return from the Quidditch match. They hear "Weasley Is Our King" and realize that the Gryffindors are doing the singing - with new words, then see Ron being carried to the castle on many shoulders. > > > ************ > > Questions for Discussion > > 1. Why do you think Filch supports Umbridge so strongly? And why does Peeves support the opposite side? > > 2. How do you react to Montague's failure to recover? Is it disconcerting, or just a bit of scatological/cartoon humor (it does involve a toilet, after all)? What about the contrasting attitudes of Ron and Hermione? Which view, if any, does JKR endorse? Why? > > 3. Why would Molly blame Ron for the Twins' departure? Do you think this is indicative of Molly's actual views, does it reflect Ron's own stress about his mother's expectations, or something else? > > 4. Hagrid says if he is sacked, he could be useful to the Order and Grubbly-Plank would get them through their exams. What do you think Hagrid's role for the order would be? What about Hagrid as a teacher? Is his statement a veiled comment about his own competence? And would hiding a giant in the forest be a serious offense if Umbridge wasn't in charge? > > 5. Hagrid calls Grawp "harmless" even though Grawp caused Hagrid's injuries. He needs to be tied down. Harry doubts he could ever be permitted to mingle with humans. Is this a signal to reassess Hermione's conclusion in GoF that wizarding attitudes toward giants is "just prejudice"? Do Grawp's circumstances cause or contribute to his wildness? > > 6. We also learn more about the centaurs. What do their attempt to ban Hagrid from the Forbidden Forest and their willingness to use violence tell us about them? Do the centaurs fit into the prejudice theme? If so, how? > > 7. Why does the crowd annoint Ron as the hero of the Quidditch match? Ginny is conspicuously absent. Didn't she catch the snitch? > > Debbie > > NOTE: For more information on HPfGU's chapter discussions, please see > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/67817 and > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/85829 as well as > > "OotP Chapter Discussions" at > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/database > > > > > > [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 darkthirty at shaw.ca Wed Nov 3 17:12:22 2004 From: darkthirty at shaw.ca (Dan Feeney) Date: Wed, 03 Nov 2004 17:12:22 -0000 Subject: Good moral core (Re: Dirty Harry/Clean Harry) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117138 Del: > > > It always goes back to "this is the right thing to do". But why ?? Neri: > > If you don't have a lot of information, going with the nice people is a better bet than going with the nasty people (hey, I just realized this is what JKR said about men ;-) ). If later it turned out you made the wrong choice, this is why we have second chances. SSSusan: > It *felt* like the right thing to do once he'd "chosen" Ron over Draco. Ron was fun, Ron was nice, it felt like the right thing to do.... It *felt* GOOD, we're told. It *felt* RIGHT. There's your reinforcement. And that doesn't seem hard to understand or believe, for me. > Rather than (understandably) giving in to their circumstances as many do, some **identify** with others outside their circumstances and fight the circumstances. Dan: Well, this is really core for me, in trying to limn the ethical dimensions of the books. Our own response to Draco in our encounters with him are set up so as to parallel Harry's. Harry, new to the WitchWizard World, as we are, hears all kinds of judgemental claptrap from Draco about what is, to Harry, more or less an entirely new and amazing world - regarding Hufflepuff ("..imagine being in Hufflepuff, I think I'd leave, wouldn't you?"), school rules (first years not allowed to have their own broomstick), the crime if Draco isn't picked for Quidditch, according to his dad, who he refers to both with derision ("I think I'll bully father into getting me one and I'll smuggle it in somehow") and with some respect (Father says), and, most tellingly, his response to Hagrid, which is dismissive (a servant of some sort). In this last, Rowling is clearly playing on our somewhat whimsical response to Hagrid - we have responded to this well-meaning but somewhat thick oaf, our first real WitchWizard character, with suspended judgement - we are basically forced to, as he is our first wizard. We may even like him, as a character. And then, after showing us Hagrid, she throws Draco into our presence, overtly arrogant, derisive, practicing prejudice in an entirely juvenile way, trying to embody, even, these recieved prrejudices. Draco is our first glimpse into the petty, into the kind of division and mean-spiritedness that is, finally, at the centre of the books. All this is quite overt. When we meet Ron, however, we are rather introduced to someone who expresses natural curiosity, and observational skills (about the scar, e.g.), self-depricating humour (Scabbers and he's useless), and, most importantly, someone who, though from an all-wizarding family, expresses fair-mindedness ("There's loads of people who come from Muggle families and they learn quick enough.") My question is, then, what choice is there? Susan says we are told it *FELT* right. Perhaps the setup by Rowling I've described is what she means, for Rowling doesn't, as usual, describe how Harry is feeling, either when he first meets Draco, though he is reminded of Dudley, or when Draco and Co. enter Ron and Harry's compartment on the train. "He was looking at Harry with a lot more interest than he'd shown back in Diagon Alley." That is, Draco is interested and observant now about Harry BECAUSE he's Harry Potter. As we know, this aspect of his fame will become quite irritating to Harry in the next 2 or 3 years. Now, without going into too great detail, the answer to Del's "why" is really the answer to why WE would choose Ron over Draco, if that is what we would do. These are tests, not tests like math tests, but like testing the waters. We are going to have to negotiate this new and amazing world, with only our internal registers to go on, at the start. Answering why Harry chooses a certain response, which has been described as right, or good, is answering why we ourselves do. But that is not Rowling's project. We do make those choices, mostly without understanding wholly why we do. There's no reductionism, or moralism involved. A better question, in my opinion, is how Rowling can make her own choices so crystal clear, without descending to that moralism. Maybe it is, after all, BECAUSE she is not interested in reducing these processes to such simple catagories, to some moral code. This is how I read Rowling, at any rate. Dan From ginnysthe1 at yahoo.com Wed Nov 3 18:04:47 2004 From: ginnysthe1 at yahoo.com (ginnysthe1) Date: Wed, 03 Nov 2004 18:04:47 -0000 Subject: The only one he ever feared? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117139 Kim here with her own questions (and I agree that Chancie's question was not stupid at all): Eustace Scrubb included the following in his response to Why is DD the only one LV ever feared?: >Voldemort believes Dumbledore has been "onto him" at least since Tom Riddle's fifth year at Hogwarts. Dumbledore is one of the few people who know that Tom Riddle transformed himself into Voldemort. Voldemort probably either knows or suspects that Dumbledore knows more about Tom Riddle's history than anyone else (maybe even more than Voldemort knows himself).< Kim now: I'd been thinking about that lately, about why so few people would know that Tom Riddle and Lord Voldemort are one and the same person. Dumbledore knows, and Olivander knows, and Harry knows, as well as who else...? How about Lucius Malfoy? Tom Riddle also told some of his cohorts at Hogwarts when he was there 50 years ago, didn't he? Anyway I guess I'm puzzled as to why Dumbledore of all people would have kept this knowledge to himself for so many years. Olivander's motives for keeping it secret I can't determine, but Dumbledore's? Wouldn't it be useful for others, especially those on the Good Side, to know Voldemort's personal history? I bet Eustace and some of you other smart posters out there have some ideas about this... Kim, who's been in the mood for asking questions lately and hope that doesn't make her seem like too much of a lazybones :-) From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Wed Nov 3 18:06:26 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Wed, 03 Nov 2004 18:06:26 -0000 Subject: Was Harry designed as the Anti-LV weapon ? In-Reply-To: <20041102194047.21933.qmail@web53110.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117140 Del: > > So here is my theory : > > DD knew that nothing or nobody already existing in the world could > > destroy LV. That's why the Order set out to create the perfect > > anti-LV soldier. > > > > It could explain a few things, but before I launch into that, I'd > > like to know if you think it's plausible ? Magda > I don't think it's plausible. You can't create something to > anticipate a prophecy. Also it would be very unsatisfying plot-wise > as it would take a fair amount of tension out of the backstory and > much out of future events as well. > > It gives too much credit to a puppet-master!Dumbledore and not > enough credit to Harry personally. SSSusan: Not to mention that if DD or others KNEW how to create such a weapon...if they knew what "ingredients" it took to defeat Voldy...why not just develop them in themselves? Why would it require a new baby? I also do NOT agree with Del's comment in a previous response that this would not prove problematic for the role of CHOICE in the series since there really isn't any choice already for Harry. I hear it argued all the time that Harry has no CHOICE, but I do not agree. JKR tells us that it *is* our choices which show what we are. And while I agree that Harry's burden is greater than others and that his choices are narrower, he DOES have the choice to refuse to fight. Yes, yes, he'd still want to live and knows that Voldy would kill him if he doesn't watch out, but he DIDN'T have to make all the noble choices he has made so far, and he COULD say, "F*** you, Dumbledore. I'm outta here. I'm heading to the Outback and minding my own." *We* know it's not likely that Harry would make that choice because we've seen the choices Harry's made and the actions he's taken so far, but that doesn't mean the choice isn't there. Siriusly Snapey Susan From chnc1024 at AOL.COM Wed Nov 3 18:15:15 2004 From: chnc1024 at AOL.COM (chnc1024 at AOL.COM) Date: Wed, 3 Nov 2004 13:15:15 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: The only one he ever feared? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117141 In a message dated 11/3/2004 8:36:50 AM Pacific Standard Time, dk59us at yahoo.com writes: 4) Voldemort believes that Harry is the one with power to vanquish the Dark Lord--even if he still doesn't know the whole prophecy--and he probably believes that Harry can only develop his powers fully under Dumbledore's guidance. My 4 cents, Cheers, Eustace_Scrubb *********************************************************** Chancie: Since my post I believe your statement above most clearly states the answer that I was looking for. As I stated in my original post, I am not disputing the fact that Dumbledore is the most powerful wizard alive, and although I didn't include it, that he has vast knowledge of the Dark Arts but refuses to use them. My real meaning in posting this question was to try and see why, knowing only Harry can defeat Voldemort, was he not more afraid of Harry. It does make since to say that Voldemort believes that Harry can only defeat him with guidance from Dumbledore. But still I wonder why, knowing what little parts of the prophecy that he does, Voldemort constantly underestimates Harry? Another poster stated, Why would a powerful wizard like Voldemort fear a 1 year old baby (sorry, I can't remember who). My first thought on this is I agree with that up until the point that Voldemort tried to AK Harry, but after that, I would think that he would start to take Harry more seriously! But again getting to the quote above... I believe you are very right that Voldemort thinks Harry can't win without DD's help. Does this make anyone else nervous? Chancie~who hopes the next to die won't be Dumbledore!!!!! [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From mgrantwich at yahoo.com Wed Nov 3 18:42:14 2004 From: mgrantwich at yahoo.com (Magda Grantwich) Date: Wed, 3 Nov 2004 10:42:14 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Unreliable narrator (Was: Snape's stalling) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041103184214.86934.qmail@web53110.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 117142 > Neri again: > Erm... now I'm really baffled. You try to make Snape look better > because other members make him look worse? Suppose for a moment > nobody > in this forum would have tried to make Snape look worse, would you > also tried to make him look better then? If you'd never talked with > anybody about the books and didn't hear any preconceived notions > about Snape, what would you have thought about him? No dear, I try (obviously not too well) to correct other members' incorrect assumptions about Snape (and other characters as well). Snape doesn't need my help to make him "look better" because an impartial and objective look at canon shows that JKR is much more subtle in presenting Snape's actions and emotions than a lot of readers realize. Your last two questions make no sense to me. I don't need other people's opinions to know how I feel about the HP books and their various characters. Some people say ABC, I post and say XYZ and that's called an exchange of opinions. Your underlying assumption that "snape apologists" are doing some serious revisioning of the novels is not shared unanimously by other posters either, at least from what I can see. Magda (who thinks Snape is going to be important in unforeseen ways in the next two books, even after he snuffs it) __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Wed Nov 3 18:42:00 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Wed, 03 Nov 2004 18:42:00 -0000 Subject: Good moral core (Re: Dirty Harry/Clean Harry) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117143 Neri wrote : "I guess this is why DD (and apparently JKR) believe in second chances." Del replies : Ah, yes, second chances, I'd fogotten about them, thank you for reminding me. They are important, second chances, precisely because they allow for honest mistakes, without eternal condemnation. Neri wrote : " Why did Harry befriend Ron rather than Draco in SS/PS? Well, I thought when reading it that the choice was pretty obvious. Ron was nice to him. Draco reminded him of Dudley." Del replies : That shows the importance of environment. If Harry had first met a nice Slytherin and an obnoxious Gryffindor, he might have chosen to go to Slytherin. Lucky he met Draco and Ron. But as I said, luck is an essential part of a hero's equipment. Del From ginnysthe1 at yahoo.com Wed Nov 3 18:53:20 2004 From: ginnysthe1 at yahoo.com (ginnysthe1) Date: Wed, 03 Nov 2004 18:53:20 -0000 Subject: The only one he ever feared? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117144 Such an interesting thread, so Kim's here too sticking in her 4 cents: Juli wrote: >What I'm thinking is WHY would a grown wizard fear a one year old baby? profecy or not, what could he do? Harry didn't defeat or whatever LV the first time, it was Lily, she's the one that left that ancient magic that made the AK backfire. LV doesn't know the whole profecy, he just heard the first sentence (the one with the power to defeat the Dark Lord will be born as the 7th month ends).< Kim now: What you say has me wondering whether there wasn't something going on (in a manner of speaking) between Lord Voldemort and Lily Potter before Harry was born. I can't remember if this question has come up before on this list, so anyone please feel free to let me know. But you're right, Harry didn't actually defeat LV the first time, it was Lily that defeated LV (via Harry). I wonder, did LV see something in Lily's green eyes during earlier battles -- was he attracted to something there? I know JKR has said that LV doesn't love anyone, but maybe she meant consciously, not subconsciously. And with someone like Voldemort, maybe what happened upon coming face to face with the brave, passionate green eyes of young Lily was of course not real love, but something like the shock of recognition of years lost to the pursuit of power and evil when he could have had a normal life and love instead. The shock might happen really quickly and cause fear, jealousy, rage, etc., all then covered up with subconscious denial, but further aggravated later by the sight of those same green eyes in the face Lily's son Harry. Then again there's the obvious argument that it was just the prophecy that led LV to Lily and James' house in an attempt to find and destroy Harry, the one who would grow up to challenge his power, and not some previous connection to Lily. But why did LV tell Lily to stand aside then? Why not kill her outright the way he'd killed James? I know folks think Voldemort is a pretty one-dimensional character and for good reason, but Tom Riddle certainly wasn't (IMO). A kernel of Tom Riddle, the bitter, rejected son, is probably still alive somewhere inside Voldemort, no matter what changes have occurred to him over the years. If I'm not mistaken, this psychology is somewhat akin to what motivated (at least partially) Hitler to commit his evil deeds. Unless it could be argued that people like Tom Riddle/Lord Voldemort, Hitler, et al. are just born bad. Comments are welcome! Cheers, Kim From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Wed Nov 3 18:56:10 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Wed, 03 Nov 2004 18:56:10 -0000 Subject: Good moral core (Re: Dirty Harry/Clean Harry) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117145 Neri wrote : " If you accept that he has free will, you must be satisfied with "because after considering the options (or not) he decided that option A was better than option B"." Alla anwered : "I agree with you about free will, I guess I am just thinking that free will has to come from somewhere too, initially at least. OK, let me try to rephrase my question again - how does Harry KNOW which decisions are right? What helps him: higher power? generation memory? What?" Del adds : Or, in my words : Option A was better than option B *according to what* ?? What scale was Harry using ? What determining principle was he applying ? He was freely choosing, but what did he base his choices on ? Del From meriaugust at yahoo.com Wed Nov 3 19:09:54 2004 From: meriaugust at yahoo.com (meriaugust) Date: Wed, 03 Nov 2004 19:09:54 -0000 Subject: CHAPTER DISCUSSION: Chapter 30 (Grawp) In-Reply-To: <004901c4c165$2c90c7c0$1502a8c0@TOSHIBALAPTOP> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117146 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "elfundeb" wrote: snip of chapter summary > ************ > > Questions for Discussion > > 1. Why do you think Filch supports Umbridge so strongly? And why does Peeves support the opposite side? Meri here: As many characters have said, he hates students and DD won't let him punish them the way he wants. DU, on the other hand, will give him a free reign to punnish those rule breakers who "befoul the castle." Peeves would probably have beeen chucked out by any other head, but DD kept him around. Peeves is just repaying the favor by tormenting the woman who made life miserable for DD. Loyalty comes in strange places, and DD isn't one to turn up his nose at anyone. > 2. How do you react to Montague's failure to recover? Is it disconcerting, or just a bit of scatological/cartoon humor (it does involve a toilet, after all)? What about the contrasting attitudes of Ron and Hermione? Which view, if any, does JKR endorse? Why? Meri: I don't know if JKR is endorsing any particular view of the situation, though I think she's the kind iof person who would not like a child to be hurt in any way, even a Slytherin. But whatever Fred and George did to Monty must have been pretty bad; I know I wouldn't want to be on the wrong end of one of their jokes. > 3. Why would Molly blame Ron for the Twins' departure? Do you think this is indicative of Molly's actual views, does it reflect Ron's own stress about his mother's expectations, or something else? Meri: Probably becuause Ron is a prefect now, he has to show responsibility and controll, but it is an unreal expectation, because no one can controll those two. Maybe at this point Ron is seriously considering blowing the old Hogwarts popsicle stand, too, and is majorly bummed out that he wasn't invited along. > 4. Hagrid says if he is sacked, he could be useful to the Order and Grubbly-Plank would get them through their exams. What do you think Hagrid's role for the order would be? What about Hagrid as a teacher? Is his statement a veiled comment about his own competence? And would hiding a giant in the forest be a serious offense if Umbridge wasn't in charge? Meri: I think that Hagrid's a pretty self aware guy. He gets that he's not the best teacher in the world, but I think he also knows that he does his best. GP could get them throught the OWLs, and Hagrid knows there are more important things that he could do for the Order. What they are I don't know, but judging by his resiliance to the spells DU and her squad cast against him it would probably be something right on the front lines and very dangerous. As to hiding Grawp in the forest, I don't know about that. DD being the accepting man he is would probably have tried to help Hagrid any way he could. Who knows, a more civilized Grawp could help liase between the WW and the giants? > 5. Hagrid calls Grawp "harmless" even though Grawp caused Hagrid's injuries. He needs to be tied down. Harry doubts he could ever be permitted to mingle with humans. Is this a signal to reassess Hermione's conclusion in GoF that wizarding attitudes toward giants is "just prejudice"? Do Grawp's circumstances cause or contribute to his wildness? Meri: Grawp knows what he was raised in: a brutish, violent and uneducated world where strength rules. Even by the end of Order he was learning a bit. So maybe there's hope for him. It's that old nature versus nurture debate, or as DD puts it, it isn't what we are born but what we grow up to be that matters. Hagrid was raised around humans, so he's been effectively civilized. Give Grawp a little time and maybe he could fit in, too. > 6. We also learn more about the centaurs. What do their attempt to ban Hagrid from the Forbidden Forest and their willingness to use violence tell us about them? Do the centaurs fit into the prejudice theme? If so, how? Meri: Centaurs seem to consider themselves above all other things. They are very protective of their forest home, though I'm not sure how much of a claim they have to it, and they are clearly very intellegent. But they aren't flexible or understanding or willing to work against what they see as fate. The fact that they are willilng to violently defend the status quo shows that they may very well prove to be a dangerous enemy for DD, if not an ally for LV. And I think many of them are prejudiced against humans. They are not willing to accept the good in the human race and are convinced that all humans are arrogant and ignorant. > 7. Why does the crowd annoint Ron as the hero of the Quidditch match? Ginny is conspicuously absent. Didn't she catch the snitch? Meri: Well, maybe the other team pulled a Bulgaria: Ron's goal saving was too good for the other team to score and so the opposing seeker caught the snitch to end the game. Anyway, probably she did, but Ron's goal saving was pretty much a miracle, wasn't it? ;) Also remember Ginny really wants to be a chaser, so perhaps she doesn't want glory as a seeker. And, despite Ginny's upswing in confidence, she doesn't seem to be the kind of person who would hog a spotlight; maybe she let Ron take the glory. Meri - who was going to write something clever here, but her mind is strangely blank... From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Wed Nov 3 19:11:09 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Wed, 03 Nov 2004 19:11:09 -0000 Subject: Was Harry designed as the Anti-LV weapon ? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117147 SSSusan wrote : "I also do NOT agree with Del's comment in a previous response that this would not prove problematic for the role of CHOICE in the series since there really isn't any choice already for Harry. I hear it argued all the time that Harry has no CHOICE, but I do not agree. JKR tells us that it *is* our choices which show what we are. And while I agree that Harry's burden is greater than others and that his choices are narrower, he DOES have the choice to refuse to fight." Del replies : I think you misunderstood what I meant, SSSusan. I didn't say that Harry doesn't have choices to make every day, including whether to fight or not. I meant that Harry never had a choice to be the Vanquisher or not. He is, period. The Prophecy says so : "The one with the power to vanquish the Dark Lord approaches". It doesn't say "One with the power", it says "*The* one with the power". Harry is the only one, whether he or anybody else wants it or likes it or not. He never had a choice : he was born the Vanquisher. My theory wouldn't change that. What it would change is that Harry would have been *meant* to be the Vanquisher, that it wasn't an accident, something that just happened. Del From moochy4ro at hotmail.com Wed Nov 3 17:15:04 2004 From: moochy4ro at hotmail.com (Lucy) Date: Wed, 03 Nov 2004 17:15:04 -0000 Subject: Why were Harry's parents so rich? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117148 Just thinking, when Harry first goes to his vault in Gringotts, he realises he has tons of money that his parents left him. Where did they get so much money because he seems embarrassed about it in front of lots of people apart from the Weasleys. Where do you think they got it? Did they have unknown well paid jobs? Lucy From zacksmom3 at bellsouth.net Wed Nov 3 17:58:20 2004 From: zacksmom3 at bellsouth.net (glavgirl) Date: Wed, 03 Nov 2004 17:58:20 -0000 Subject: Dementor's in Little Winging Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117149 In OOTP we learned that Umbridge had ordered the Dementor's to Little Winging. Since she was working at the MoM at the time, would the ministry not have a record of someone ordering them? No more mention was made about it after Harry's hearing. Are we going to find out in HBP that the Minister actually finds out about Umbridge and the dementor's? It almost appears like she is one of Voldemort's Death Eaters instead of a Ministry official. She got along well with Draco and his cronies in Slytherin. Could Umbridge be one of Voldemort's?? Glavgirl From steve at hp-lexicon.org Wed Nov 3 20:34:10 2004 From: steve at hp-lexicon.org (hp_lexicon) Date: Wed, 03 Nov 2004 20:34:10 -0000 Subject: Why were Harry's parents so rich? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117150 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Lucy" wrote: > > Just thinking, when Harry first goes to his vault in Gringotts, he realises he has tons of > money that his parents left him. > Where do you think they got it? Did they have unknown well paid jobs? Hi, Lucy: Lily and James were about 22 when they died, so there wasn't much time for them to have high-paying jobs. In the few years that they lived after leaving Hogwarts, it would seem that they were plenty busy fighting the Death Eaters. After all, they escaped Voldemort three times in that period. Rowling said in an interview that James inherited his fortune, actually. There are some who like to imagine that since James' family came from Godric's Hollow, and that since Bowman Wright, the inventor of the Golden Snitch, was also from Godric's Hollow, that James is the heir to the Golden Snitch fortune. I personally like that idea, although it's pure speculation. It does seem odd that Rowling would place Wright in Godric's Hollow of all places without some sort of reason. On the other hand, every time I start to think that way I just remember Mark Evans and stop assuming that everything has to mean something... Steve The Lexicon From spotthedungbeetle at hotmail.com Wed Nov 3 21:13:24 2004 From: spotthedungbeetle at hotmail.com (dungrollin) Date: Wed, 03 Nov 2004 21:13:24 -0000 Subject: Good moral core (Re: Dirty Harry/Clean Harry) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117151 > Neri wrote : > " If you accept that he has free will, you must be satisfied with > "because after considering the options (or not) he decided that > option A was better than option B"." > > Alla anwered : > OK, let me try to rephrase my question again - how does Harry KNOW > which decisions are right? What helps him: higher power? generation > memory? What?" > > Del rephrases: > Option A was better than option B *according to what* ?? What scale > was Harry using ? What determining principle was he applying ? He > was freely choosing, but what did he base his choices on ? Dungrollin opines: I don't know what JKR would say, and, for that matter I don't know what Harry would say, either; but I would assume what I assume for everyone in real life: anticipatory guilt. Decisions are made basically on the principle of `is it worth it?' Was the guilt that Harry would feel over winding up Dudders at the beginning of OotP likely to outweigh the pleasure he got from doing it? Didn't seem like it to me ? didn't seem like he felt at all bad about it. Would the guilt of hanging around doing nothing while Sirius was being tortured by Voldy outweigh the danger Harry would put himself in by dashing off to his rescue? Evidently so. Harry doesn't appear to be a member of an organised religion (or if he is, he's keeping very quiet about it); he bases his actions on imagining whether he can live with himself if he does or doesn't follow a certain course. When I say `imagining' it can be a split second decision, or a long drawn-out process of agonising (but I think Harry generally goes for the former). Voldy, on the other hand, doesn't appear to feel any guilt at all. About anything or anyone. So he places far fewer curbs on his own behaviour. His decisions are still based on `is it worth it?' But with a far more materialistic basis. Killing mudbloods makes him feel good, it demonstrates his power over the inferior to himself and others. Is this good feeling going to be outweighed by the guilt he feels for having taken a human life? Nope. Decision made. The ability to empathise is the difference between them. Where you think this ability comes from depends upon your views, (and how much you've thought about it). I would like to say one thing about nature/nurture (in the RW), however, and that is that the debate cannot be resolved philosophically, it can only be resolved by looking at evidence. If you're interested, a mind-bendingly good book is Nature Via Nurture by Matt Ridley (though it could be quite depressing for parents). Nurture can only have an effect if there is a nature to work on, and nature can only reach its full potential if it is nurtured in a certain way. They both have effects, but they interact with each other, rather than just contributing a percentage to the eventual character of a person. With this in mind, Harry being brought up in a wizarding family as a `pampered little prince' *could* have had a disastrous effect on him; and Riddle having had a loving family *could* have changed a great deal. What JKR would say, however, I have no idea. Dungrollin Wishing, on days like today, that Drop the Dead Donkey would come back. From foxmoth at qnet.com Wed Nov 3 21:18:16 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Wed, 03 Nov 2004 21:18:16 -0000 Subject: Unreliable narrator (Was: Snape's stalling) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117152 > > Pippin: > > > > Well, I won't deny that I am a Snape apologist. I don't see myself as a "conspiracy theorist reader" as you defined the term.<< > > > > Neri: > This is good to know. I hope you won't have troubles being admitted into the Safe House after that last statement ;-) . Pippin: Hmmm...I should clarify. I have hypothesized that some characters who appear to be working alone are collaborating "behind the scenes" with other characters. That is the dictionary definition of a conspiracy theory, and my place in the safe house is assured. However, I did not arrive at these theories by a process of subversive reading, if that is the theory that there is no foundational reading of the text as intended by the author, or that such a reading need not be privileged over other readings. ( I am not educated in these matters, having strenuously avoided taking English lit in college, so I would appreciate any corrections. ) Rather, I approach the text as a conventionally constructed mystery -- there has been a crime or crimes committed which upset the social order. This upset in the social order usually includes the accusation of wrongly suspected parties. The task of the sleuth is to restore the social order by finding out those who were guilty of the crime. To this end, the author seeds the text with clues and with misleading information (red herrings) which both the reader and the sleuth may use to arrive at the identity of the culprit. Though according to the rules of a fair mystery, the author must not present false evidence without some clue that it is false, it is not cheating to have the sleuth draw false conclusions from the evidence he is given, and relate them to himself (and the reader) as if they were truth. I note that Rowling uses several narrative voices, occasionally switching unexpectedly, for example in chapter 11 of PS/SS, which goes from third person limited to third person omniscient. This is usually considered a stylistic error, but in this case I believe it was done deliberately to emphasize that the usual point of view in the books is limited to Harry and (IMO) is only as objective as he is. Harry is not very objective where Snape is concerned, therefore, IMO, the narrative voice is not either. However, I assume that Snape is one of the innocent parties and post on that basis. Does that clear things up? Pippin From iris_ft at yahoo.fr Wed Nov 3 21:22:10 2004 From: iris_ft at yahoo.fr (iris_ft) Date: Wed, 03 Nov 2004 21:22:10 -0000 Subject: CHAPTER DISCUSSION: Chapter 30 (Grawp) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117153 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "meriaugust" wrote: > > 5. Hagrid calls Grawp "harmless" even though Grawp caused > Hagrid's injuries. He needs to be tied down. Harry doubts he could > ever be permitted to mingle with humans. Is this a signal to > reassess Hermione's conclusion in GoF that wizarding attitudes > toward giants is "just prejudice"? Do Grawp's circumstances cause > or contribute to his wildness? > > Meri: Grawp knows what he was raised in: a brutish, violent and > uneducated world where strength rules. Even by the end of Order he > was learning a bit. So maybe there's hope for him. It's that old > nature versus nurture debate, or as DD puts it, it isn't what we > are born but what we grow up to be that matters. Hagrid was raised > around humans, so he's been effectively civilized. Give Grawp a > little time and maybe he could fit in, too. > Now Iris: I agree. Moreover, I don't think JKR used Grawp only as a narrative device. OK, tell me that I'm obsessed with metaphors, and that I'm always writing the same thing, but this could be what Grawp is actually. He has a name that isn't a name, a body that looks like a huge heap of earth and rocks, and he behaves like an animal. In Spanish baroque literature, he would be "un bruto". That word designates a creature that is not civilised, that is not educated, and has no consciousness. It's an untreated material that is waiting for somebody to improve it, a chaos. That's the way I see Grawp. He's a chaotic entity; he belongs at the same time to the three reigns, animal by his behaviour, vegetal and mineral by his aspect. Now, what does Hagrid want for him? He wants to make him more human, he wants to make him improve. And he naturally asks Harry and Hermione to do it, because they represent what Grawp needs: consciousness, intellect, and the ability to reason. Hermione is named after Hermes, one of the most spiritual gods in the Greek pantheon. And Harry's second name is "Potter": wouldn't he be perfect to fashion Grawp and make him become more human? Another detail, I don't know if you'll agree: Grawp's name sounds to me like "Grow up". Just what Harry has to do. Harry is still a teenager. But Grawp is there to make him grow up, because now Harry has to care for him. Grawp is like the prophecy. He gives Harry responsibilities, and Harry will have to grow up to fulfil them plainly. Of course, this is only a supposition. We have to wait and see what JKR does with Grawp's character in the two next books. One last comment: the untreated and chaotic material is where the alchemical work necessarily starts. It could be interesting, if we consider how important Alchemy seems to be in the series. But this is just my opinion we still need two pieces of the puzzle. Two Knuts for Grawp, Amicalement, Iris From bboyminn at yahoo.com Wed Nov 3 21:38:05 2004 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Wed, 03 Nov 2004 21:38:05 -0000 Subject: Totally Obssessed - Found It! - Spinners End - Near BRISTOL! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117154 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Geoff Bannister" wrote: > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "finwitch" > wrote: > > Finwitch: > > > Particularly looking at the overall map once we find where > > Spinners End and Surrey are... Flight over Bristol is quite > > direct, really. No wonder it took Hagrid all day if that's where > > Harry used to live. > > > Geoff: > I'm sorry keep banging away about this but I haven't really had a > sensible reply from anyone. > > Why are we considering Hagrid making a journey from Spinners End to > Surrey with baby Harry? > > The Potters were living in Godric's Hollow; some folk argue that > this is in Wales. So what's Spinners End go to do with this? > > I've also said that to fly directly from the northern outskirts of > Weston-super-Mare to Surrey would involve flying south of Bristol. > > Geoff bboyminn: Hate to sound like a broken record, but I still think you are looking too deep for something that isn't there. There is no grand conspiracy or deep revelation. It's as simple as this... Hargrid flew near Bristol: /A/, maybe not /THE/ but /A/, Spinners End is near Bristol. Discuss. That's extremely thin information to build any conclusion on; of course, that's never stopped us before. If you draw a straight line from just north of Weston-super-Mare (the approx location of Spinners End) to Staines in North Surrey, you will pass within 3 to 4 miles of the heart of Bristol. (my map has a resolution of 16 miles to the inch; so best guess) Now I've never been to Bristol, but if you go to the heart of Minneapolis and drive 3 to 4 miles in any direction, you are still in the city. Given that people don't speak in absolutes, Hagrid might seen 3 to 4 miles from the heart of the city as 'flew over Bristol'. As far as Wales, if you extend a line from Staines to Britol, beyond Bristol, it hits land again very near Cardiff, Wales. So the connection to Wales is nothing more than if you fly in a straight line west of Bristol, you hit the southern tip of Wales. If you extend that line far enough, I think you will hit the southern tip of Ireland (Ireland is not actually on my map), and we could therefore reach the conclusion that Godric's Hollow is in Ireland. BUT, and this is a big BUT, Harry wasn't likely to be coming from Grodic's Hollow, he was more likely to be coming from the location where Hagrid hid him after rescuing him from Godric's Hollow. Personally, I've alway believe Hagrid hid Harry at the Longbottoms home, but that's another subject all together. Point: you seem to be looking for logical depth in something that is a shallow connection at best. /A/ Spinners End is near Bristol: Hagrid flew near Bristol; make of it what you will. Also, unless I'm mistaken, JKR used to live in and near Bristol, so she might be familiar with the area. It was just a thought. Steve/bboyminn (was bboy_mn) From nkafkafi at yahoo.com Wed Nov 3 22:02:46 2004 From: nkafkafi at yahoo.com (nkafkafi) Date: Wed, 03 Nov 2004 22:02:46 -0000 Subject: Good moral core (Re: Dirty Harry/Clean Harry) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117155 > Alla: > I agree with you about free will, I guess I am just thinking that > free will has to come from somewhere too, initially at least. Neri: Sure it comes from somewhere initially. There is nature and there is nurture. A child is born with certain genes and interacts with his environment. But then at some point free will appears. Once it did, the chain of cause and effect sort of breaks down. It must be, or the choices of the child would be uniquely determined by his nature and nurture, and then it's not free will. > Alla: > OK, let me try to rephrase my question again - how does Harry KNOW > which decisions are right? What helps him: higher power? generation > memory? What? Neri: I think I still don't understand your question. Harry is a sentient being with free will. He is surely capable of making decisions for himself, without the help of higher powers, generation memory and so on. How do you know, in your life, which decisions are right? OK, you might tell me that you frequently don't KNOW for sure which are the right decisions, you just do your best to choose right, and sometimes you get it wrong. And so does Harry. So are you asking why is Harry special? Why is it him and not somebody else who has the power to vanquish the Dark Lord? Well, my thoughts (especially after OotP) are that he is NOT that special. He just happens to be the one taken to fill the position. I mean, whatever the-power-the-dark-lord-knows-not is, whether it is Love, Sacrificial Love, Humanity, Life and so on (take your pick) it seems absurd to think that only Harry has it. Certainly many others also have this thing. It is abundant enough so the guys in the DoM could fill a whole room with the stuff. But fate, circumstances, and the Dark Lord himself marked Harry for the position, and now he's stuck with it. But at least he gets to be the hero of the story (not many benefits in this). I mean, it is like asking why is Harry the seeker of the Gryffindor team. He is because, out of all the candidates available at the time, he happened to be the most suitable for this position (or at least McGonagall and Wood thought he was). He has the abilities, but winning the match still depends on him making the right choices at the right moment, and he still can't do it without the six players in the other positions. And if it were Dean Thomas, not Harry, who was chosen for the position, then we would have asked why is it Dean. But SOMEONE got to be the seeker, and someone also got to be the LV nemesis (or there's no story) and it just happened to be Harry. Neri From foxmoth at qnet.com Wed Nov 3 22:13:52 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Wed, 03 Nov 2004 22:13:52 -0000 Subject: Good moral core (Re: Dirty Harry/Clean Harry) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117156 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "dungrollin" wrote: > The ability to empathise is the difference between them. Where you think this ability comes from depends upon your views, (and how much you've thought about it). > With this in mind, Harry being brought up in a wizarding family as a `pampered little prince' *could* have had a disastrous effect on him; and Riddle having had a loving family *could* have changed a great deal. > > What JKR would say, however, I have no idea. > Pippin: I think she would say that we can't know. To paraphrase Dumbledore's words in PoA, the consequences of our heredity and our environment are always so complicated, so diverse, that assigning causes to our choices is a difficult business indeed. Which is why, IMO, Dumbledore says it is choices ( and not heredity or environment) that we should consider when we are trying to understand what someone is. That is also the basis for extending compassion even to someone as downright evil as Riddle/Voldemort. We cannot know that we wouldn't have done the same thing in his place. Pippin From khinterberg at yahoo.com Wed Nov 3 22:35:44 2004 From: khinterberg at yahoo.com (khinterberg) Date: Wed, 03 Nov 2004 22:35:44 -0000 Subject: Alchemical ramblings Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117157 Many people view alchemy as an important idea in the Harry Potter books. Because of this, I read a small book entitled "Alchemy: The Great Secret" which contained a basic education on the subject and also writings of different people on the subject. I looked closely at the Jung excerpt, as many people refer to him when speaking of Harry Potter. I will put the entirety of his explanation of the Nigredo(Black), Albedo(White), and Rubedo(Red) stages here, because I can only begin to form ideas about what this means in connection to Harry Potter. Here goes. "The nigredo or blackness is the initial state, either present from the beginning as a quality of the prima materia, the chaos or massa confusa, or else produced by the separation(solutio, separatio, divisio, putrifactio) of the elements. If the separated condition is assumed at the start, as sometimes happens, then a union of opposites is performed under the likeness of a union of male and female(called the coniugium, matrimonium, coniunctio, coitus), followed by the death of the product of the union(mortifacatio, calcinatio, putrifactio) and a corresponding nigredo. From this the washing(ablutio, baptisme) either leads direct to the whitening(albedo), or else the soul(anima) released at the "death" is reunited with the dead body and brings about its resurrection, or again the "many colours"(omnes colores), or "peacock's tail"(cauda pavonis), lead to the one white colour that contains all colours. At this point the first main goal of the process is reached, namely the albedo, tinctura alba, terra alba foliata, lapis albus, etc., highly prized by many alchemists as if it were the ultimate goal. It is the silver or moon condition, which still has to be raised to the sun condition. The albedo is, so to speak, the daybreak, but not till the rubedo is it sunrise. The transition to the rubedo is formed by the citrinitas(yellow), though this, as we have said, was omitted later. the rubedo then follows direct from the albedo as the result of raising the heat of the fire to its highest intensity. The red and the white are King and Queen, who may also celebrate their "chymical wedding" at this stage..." -C.G. Jung, Psychology and Alchemy, 1944 This process leads the the scarlet red Philosopher's Stone. I would also like to add the the symbol for the Stone is the phoenix, and that snakes, eagles, and lions are found often in the symbolism as well. Even a toad is a symbol for the black raw state of the material at the beginning of the process. Let the interpretations begin. khinterberg, who is terribly upset with her country after the election From dk59us at yahoo.com Wed Nov 3 23:30:43 2004 From: dk59us at yahoo.com (Eustace_Scrubb) Date: Wed, 03 Nov 2004 23:30:43 -0000 Subject: The only one he ever feared? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117158 Kim wrote: > > I'd been thinking about that lately, about why so few people would > know that Tom Riddle and Lord Voldemort are one and the same person. > Dumbledore knows, and Olivander knows, and Harry knows, as well as > who else...? How about Lucius Malfoy? Tom Riddle also told some of > his cohorts at Hogwarts when he was there 50 years ago, didn't he? > Anyway I guess I'm puzzled as to why Dumbledore of all people would > have kept this knowledge to himself for so many years. Olivander's > motives for keeping it secret I can't determine, but Dumbledore's? > Wouldn't it be useful for others, especially those on the Good Side, > to know Voldemort's personal history? I bet Eustace and some of you > other smart posters out there have some ideas about this... > > Kim, > who's been in the mood for asking questions lately and hope that > doesn't make her seem like too much of a lazybones :-) Now Eustace_Scrubb: Another excellent question! And I hope some of the _really_ smart posters have better explanations than me! Mr. Ollivander is an interesting and obscure character...I have a sense that he doesn't share much of what he knows. I wonder if he isn't bound in some way to share secrets only with those who are personally connected to them, in sort of the same way only those mentioned in a prophecy can pick up an orb in the Department of Mysteries. But why _should_ Dumbledore keep the Voldemort/Tom Riddle connection secret? And _when_ did Dumbledore make the connection himself? All we really know is that this probably happened sometime after about 1970 (when Voldemort declared himself) and before the spring of 1993 when he tells Harry and the Weasleys...and Lockhart who probably didn't retain it of course. [Dates roughly based on the HP_Lexicon timelines but I didn't re-check my memory of them.] Perhaps Dumbledore figured this out _after_ Godric's Hollow...with LV gone perhaps he saw no purpose in publicizing it at that time. Once the DEs were rounded up and shipped off to Azkaban or killed, it seems likely the Wizarding World wouldn't have cared much. Perhaps there was something about the aftermath of Godric's Hollow that jogged Dumbledore's memory--suddenly being responsible for a little dark-haired orphan did it. But I don't really know, so these are really just musings... Cheers, Eustace_Scrubb "If you're referring to the incident with the dragon, I was barely involved." From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Wed Nov 3 23:46:27 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Wed, 03 Nov 2004 23:46:27 -0000 Subject: Good moral core (Re: Dirty Harry/Clean Harry) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117159 Neri wrote : "Sure it comes from somewhere initially. There is nature and there is nurture. A child is born with certain genes and interacts with his environment. But then at some point free will appears. Once it did, the chain of cause and effect sort of breaks down. It must be, or the choices of the child would be uniquely determined by his nature and nurture, and then it's not free will." Del replies : But free will is limited by both nature and nurture. Mental and physical illnesses, for example, can severely restrict the way someone uses their free will. In fact, they can restrict it so much that sometimes this will isn't free anymore. So for example, if Tom was a sociopath right from childhood, then his free will was severely restricted by his condition. As for Harry, he seems to repeatedly make instinctive decisions. Because those choices have good consequences, we don't wonder too much about them. But let's see things another way : what if Harry's decision to go after the Philosopher's stone had resulted in Hermione's or Ron's death ? What if Harry's decision to go after the spiders in CoS had resulted in Ron's death ? What if Harry's decision to enter the Chamber of Secrets had resulted in his own death, in Ginny's death and in Diary!Tom's gaining a real body ? And so on. In short, what if Harry's apparent good decisions had had bad consequences ? Wouldn't we then wonder why he took such suicidal decisions, maybe even what was wrong with him ? Harry often sees how close things came to go awfully wrong, and yet when he has to make another decision, he goes down the exact same route. Is it only because it went well the previous times, so he somehow expects that it will go well again, or is it because there's something inside him that's urging him to make those decisions again and again ? Something that instantaneously *limits* his free will by making him feel that there's only one right thing to do ? Someone suggested that maybe it was empathy. Could be. Neri wrote : " How do you know, in your life, which decisions are right? OK, you might tell me that you frequently don't KNOW for sure which are the right decisions, you just do your best to choose right, and sometimes you get it wrong." Del replies : I am a Christian, so I have the commandments and counsels of God to tell me how to make my choices. I try to take decisions that agree with this system that I chose. I try to apply the Scriptures. I pray too. I don't just take a difficult decision with no basis. But Harry seems to do that often. Or rather, we are often given reasons that seem obvious, but that are not really. For example : why go to the Chamber of Secrets ? To save Ginny. But why risk his life, Ron's life, even Lockhart's life for what it's worth, to try and save Ginny ? What makes Ginny's life worth risking those 3 lives ? I'm not saying it's a bad thing, of course not, but I'm wondering what is Harry's underlying belief system. Another example : Harry refused to let Sirius and Remus kill Pettigrew. Why ? Because he doesn't want them to be murderers, and he thinks his dad would not have wanted that either. But what's wrong with being the murderer of someone like Pettigrew ? And what makes Harry think that he knows what his father would have wanted ? Wouldn't Sirius and Remus know better ? Also, what makes Harry think he has a right to stop Sirius from getting his revenge for those 12 years in Azkaban ? Again, Harry was right by my book, but we aren't told why he thinks that way. It's just "the right thing to do". But why ? I know why *I* think it was the right thing to do, but I don't know why Harry thinks so. This is also why it is so confusing for me when on the other hand Harry does things that I disagree with. Sometimes I feel he has the same beliefs as I do, but sometimes I don't. And the thing is : we do not know what his beliefs actually are. Neri wrote : "So are you asking why is Harry special? Why is it him and not somebody else who has the power to vanquish the Dark Lord? Well, my thoughts (especially after OotP) are that he is NOT that special. He just happens to be the one taken to fill the position." Del replies : But doesn't that go against his free will ? Now that he knows about the Prophecy, this knowledge will interfere with his decision-making. Because he knows he is The One, he might decide to do things he might not have done otherwise, or the other way around. Whether this means that he is more free or less free is not the point : the point is that his free will is now conditioned by his knowledge IMO. In other words : IMO, free will is not really free. It is only free within the limits your nature and your nurture have put on you. Del From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Wed Nov 3 23:50:34 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Wed, 03 Nov 2004 23:50:34 -0000 Subject: Good moral core (Re: Dirty Harry/Clean Harry) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117160 SSSusan: > > It *felt* like the right thing to do once he'd "chosen" Ron > > over Draco. Ron was fun, Ron was nice, it felt like the right > > thing to do.... It *felt* GOOD, we're told. It *felt* RIGHT. > > There's your reinforcement. And that doesn't seem hard to > > understand or believe, for me. Dan: > Well, this is really core for me, in trying to limn the ethical > dimensions of the books. > > Our own response to Draco in our encounters with him are set up so > as to parallel Harry's. > When we meet Ron, however, we are rather introduced to someone who > expresses natural curiosity, and observational skills (about the > scar, e.g.), self-depricating humour (Scabbers and he's useless), > and, most importantly, someone who, though from an all-wizarding > family, expresses fair-mindedness ("There's loads of people who > come from Muggle families and they learn quick enough.") > > My question is, then, what choice is there? Susan says we are told > it *FELT* right. Perhaps the setup by Rowling I've described is > what she means, for Rowling doesn't, as usual, describe how Harry > is feeling, either when he first meets Draco, though he is > reminded of Dudley, or when Draco and Co. enter Ron and Harry's > compartment on the train. SSSusan: You're right that there is no sentence which says, "And Harry felt good for having shared his food!" :-) However, there is this: "Go on, have a pasty," said Harry, who had never had anything to share before or, indeed, anyone to share it with. It was *a nice feeling*, sitting there with Ron, eating their way through all Harry's pasties, cakes, and candies...." [SS, US hardback, p. 102, emphasis added] *Perhaps* I've done some interpretation here(?), but it seemed pretty straightforward to me that Harry is enjoying being with Ron AND sharing his stuff. Siriusly Snapey Susan From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Wed Nov 3 23:59:13 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Wed, 03 Nov 2004 23:59:13 -0000 Subject: Good moral core (Re: Dirty Harry/Clean Harry) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117161 > Neri: > Sure it comes from somewhere initially. There is nature and there is > nurture. A child is born with certain genes and interacts with his > environment. But then at some point free will appears. Once it did, > the chain of cause and effect sort of breaks down. It must be, or the > choices of the child would be uniquely determined by his nature and > nurture, and then it's not free will. Alla: Do you feel that free will is given to us by G-d? If I understood Geoff's position correctly, that was his POV. That I understand perfectly ( not sure if I agree or not, but at least understand). I think I at least agree with you that free will is not with us from birth. I think I am in the most agreement with Susan - that Harry does it because it "feels right", but who gave him this "moral compass"? From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Thu Nov 4 00:08:20 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Thu, 04 Nov 2004 00:08:20 -0000 Subject: Good moral core (Re: Dirty Harry/Clean Harry) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117162 Neri wrote : > "If you accept that he has free will, you must be satisfied with > "because after considering the options (or not) he decided that > option A was better than option B"." Alla anwered : > OK, let me try to rephrase my question again - how does Harry KNOW > which decisions are right? What helps him: higher power? generation > memory? What?" Del adds : > Or, in my words : > Option A was better than option B *according to what* ?? What scale > was Harry using ? What determining principle was he applying ? He > was freely choosing, but what did he base his choices on ? SSSusan: Well, if I may, I'd humbly direct you to #117135, where I attempted to provide at least one possibility. Does there have to be a determining principle or a scale? I'm not so sure it's so systematic. Don't some people just do good things because they've seen bad things and don't want to repeat them? Or because they like how they feel inside when they've done them? Harry's been hurt; Harry's seen hatred, bullying, shallow people who care only for themselves in the Dursleys. I'd think that experience could have taught him what he DIDN'T want to become. And then add to those negative "role models" the POSITIVE reinforcement he got from things like being friendly with Ron, and I think it's fairly easy to understand why he makes "good" choices frequently. Siriusly Snapey Susan From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Thu Nov 4 00:10:12 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Thu, 04 Nov 2004 00:10:12 -0000 Subject: Good moral core (Re: Dirty Harry/Clean Harry) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117163 SSSusan wrote : "You're right that there is no sentence which says, "And Harry felt good for having shared his food!" :-) However, there is this: "Go on, have a pasty," said Harry, who had never had anything to share before or, indeed, anyone to share it with. It was *a nice feeling*, sitting there with Ron, eating their way through all Harry's pasties, cakes, and candies...." [SS, US hardback, p. 102, emphasis added] *Perhaps* I've done some interpretation here(?), but it seemed pretty straightforward to me that Harry is enjoying being with Ron AND sharing his stuff." Del replies : I agree that once he'd done it, he liked the feelings it created in him. But why did he tell Ron to go and have a pasty to start with ? As the narrator reminds us, Harry never had an opportunity to share before, so he doesn't know that sharing creates good feelings. Moreover, the Dursleys taught him by example that it is better *not* to share, that the ideal way is to have as much for yourself as possible. So *why* did he invite Ron to his feast ? What prompted him to share ? Del From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Thu Nov 4 00:14:01 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Thu, 04 Nov 2004 00:14:01 -0000 Subject: Was Harry designed as the Anti-LV weapon ? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117164 SSSusan wrote : > "I also do NOT agree with Del's comment in a previous response > that this would not prove problematic for the role of CHOICE in > the series since there really isn't any choice already for Harry. > I hear it argued all the time that Harry has no CHOICE, but I do > not agree. JKR tells us that it *is* our choices which show what > we are. And while I agree that Harry's burden is greater than > others and that his choices are narrower, he DOES have the choice > to refuse to fight." Del replies : > I think you misunderstood what I meant, SSSusan. > I didn't say that Harry doesn't have choices to make every day, > including whether to fight or not. > I meant that Harry never had a choice to be the Vanquisher or not. > He is, period. The Prophecy says so : "The one with the power to > vanquish the Dark Lord approaches". It doesn't say "One with the > power", it says "*The* one with the power". Harry is the only one, > whether he or anybody else wants it or likes it or not. He never > had a choice : he was born the Vanquisher. > > My theory wouldn't change that. What it would change is that Harry > would have been *meant* to be the Vanquisher, that it wasn't an > accident, something that just happened. SSSusan: Thanks, Del. I understand more clearly what you are saying and stand corrected. My only objection with the theory, then, would be the issue of why DD (or whomever it was in charge) would DO this. If they knew the necessary "ingredients," then why would they NEED to start from scratch w/ a baby? Why couldn't they apply the "stuff" [sorry--brain fade] to themselves? So I guess I'm wondering if you can flesh out that part of it. Siriusly Snapey Susan From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Thu Nov 4 00:15:08 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Thu, 04 Nov 2004 00:15:08 -0000 Subject: Good moral core (Re: Dirty Harry/Clean Harry) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117165 > Del replies : > So *why* did he invite Ron to his feast ? What prompted him to share ? > Alla: I think when Harry is that old, I am perfectly happy to accept the "free will" answer. He did it because he chose to sounds like a good answer for me, because at the age eleven I think child can choose. I am just not sure when it starts. From jhnbwmn at hotmail.com Thu Nov 4 00:17:35 2004 From: jhnbwmn at hotmail.com (johnbowman19) Date: Thu, 04 Nov 2004 00:17:35 -0000 Subject: Felix Felicis In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117166 Does anyone else remember when JK's door opened before this and gave us the description of a man who looked like a lion? I believe it is a description of Felix and that he is the new DADA teacher. From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Thu Nov 4 00:28:08 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Thu, 04 Nov 2004 00:28:08 -0000 Subject: Good moral core (Re: Dirty Harry/Clean Harry) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117167 Del: > Harry often sees how close things came to go awfully wrong, and yet > when he has to make another decision, he goes down the exact same > route. Is it only because it went well the previous times, so he > somehow expects that it will go well again, or is it because > there's something inside him that's urging him to make those > decisions again and again ? Something that instantaneously > *limits* his free will by making him feel that there's only one > right thing to do ? SSSusan: My, we're meeting a lot today, Del. I think you may be right about an inner urging, and I find it interesting that you think of that urging as being that LIMITS free will. For some, like me, *knowing* how something made him feel previously can actually be FREEING. How? It helps him understand what he wants to do next time. If he made a choice which made him feel proud or content or good all over, I don't see it as a *limiting* factor next time he's faced with an option. He might well feel *freed* by knowing he's going to feel positive if he makes a similar choice this time. I may not be making any sense! I'm operating on 4 hours of sleep after watching those dratted election returns. Siriusly Snapey Susan From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Thu Nov 4 00:40:25 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Thu, 04 Nov 2004 00:40:25 -0000 Subject: Good moral core (Re: Dirty Harry/Clean Harry) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117168 Alla: > Do you feel that free will is given to us by G-d? If I understood > Geoff's position correctly, that was his POV. > > That I understand perfectly ( not sure if I agree or not, but at > least understand). > > I think I at least agree with you that free will is not with us > from birth. > > I think I am in the most agreement with Susan - that Harry does > it because it "feels right", but who gave him this "moral > compass"? SSSusan: This may sound like a copout, I realize, Alla, but what I'm arguing is that the moral compass may, to some degree, just "be there." Think of Geoff's comments about the students he's taught over 30 years and how they differ. Sometimes we just can't explain those differences. Sometimes we *can*--e.g., Del expresses that her Christianity colors her moral choices greatly. Other times it just seems to be there without its being some specific set of moral strictures that have been explicitly taught as one would learn Christian doctrine. So likely in that case it just comes in large part from life experiences and reinforcement. ["Wow. THAT felt good!" for instance.] I've argued Harry may have identified with others *outside* his nasty upbringing and determined he wanted to be like them, rather than like the Dursleys. I understand that we can't know WHY Harry was able to do this when other kids grow up repeating the exact negative, abusive patterns they saw in their adults. So some of it's a mystery, I suppose. Like Neri's been saying. There's nature, there's nurture, and there's free will. Who can account for free will? Harry chooses. He just does. I *think* Del's asking about this because, since we don't get explanation from Harry about how he chooses, she just wants to know WHY. And I don't think we always can. Siriusly Snapey Susan From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Thu Nov 4 00:46:26 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Thu, 04 Nov 2004 00:46:26 -0000 Subject: Good moral core (Re: Dirty Harry/Clean Harry) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117169 SSSusan wrote : " Does there have to be a determining principle or a scale? I'm not so sure it's so systematic." Del replies : It might not be systematic, but it is very often. If you don't give guidelines to kids, many of them will settle on the most natural ones : personal satisfaction and immediate gratification. They will do what feels good at the moment, no matter what the consequences might be for themselves or for others. Harry is not even in this situation : he *was* taught some principles by the Dursleys, albeit bad ones. And yet as soon as he gets away from the Dursleys, those principles are immediately replaced by good ones. How come ? SSSusan wrote : " Don't some people just do good things because they've seen bad things and don't want to repeat them?" Del replies : Yes, but very often it implies a *conscious* decision. One first has to realise what happened and why it happened, and then one has to decide not to do it, or identify an opposite behaviour, and then one has to catch oneself when doing it or when having an opportunity to do otherwise. Harry just seems to jump from "I don't like that bad behaviour" to "I'll do that opposite behaviour". SSSusan wrote : " Or because they like how they feel inside when they've done them? Harry's been hurt; Harry's seen hatred, bullying, shallow people who care only for themselves in the Dursleys. I'd think that experience could have taught him what he DIDN'T want to become." Del replies : Agreed. Harry doesn't want to be like the Dursleys. But unless he actually studied what the Dursleys did, and why, and why he didn't like it, then the probability that he will find out by himself how not to be like them is slim. Especially since we are almost never told that Harry takes a decision based on what the Dursleys would have done or not. This relates to the feeling many people have that Harry is *not enough* damaged by his childhood. He just seems to get over it in a wink. That's not logical to me. Harry must have been going through different stages. Most of them might have been unconscious, but I can't believe that there weren't a few that were conscious. And yet we never see those conscious steps. He was abused, but he doesn't seem to go through the struggle of realigning his beliefs about the world or himself that many abused kids have to go through. Del From klevasseur at earthlink.net Wed Nov 3 21:58:36 2004 From: klevasseur at earthlink.net (ms_luna_knows) Date: Wed, 03 Nov 2004 21:58:36 -0000 Subject: Detour (Was Re: Draco chapter) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117170 Eustace wrote, > > So perhaps he does try to spring Lucius from Azkaban, but ends up > > doing something completely unrelated. Then again, nobody seems to > > think that Azkaban is going to be very difficult for the DEs to > > break out of--Draco's "assistance" might not be needed or even > > welcome. > Mandy here, > I think it would have to be. What about Lucius being executed by LV > for completely cocking-up the whole MOM incident. A grieving Draco > my make a detour to seek out the only person who can kill > LV....Harry. I'm not suggesting Dragco becomes suddenly good, but it > might pull him in towards the center of the action in an interesting > way. Karen here, Has anyone considered a theory that Draco's detour is more of a personal detour- more of crisis of self? Considering that Lucius is now a Known DE, not an assumed one, LM will surely lose a great deal of his perceived power within the WW and so will Draco at Hogwarts. Think about what Draco bases who he is on; being from a pure blood, very wealthly, powerful family. Lucius will/should lose the powerful part for sure, at least in the MoM, Can't see the new MoM letting in ANY Known DE. Therefore Draco will lose "bragging rights"...I don't know if we'll hear too much more about what is father will do, or who his father will report to at the MoM...But then Draco may figure out that his father has more "power" because of his association with LV. At least people will fear LM and that gives him a certain type of power.. Draco will come to bask in that. I think Draco will have a "detour" because of his crisis, but will make his way back to be the same obnoxious git we have grown to loath. From snapesangel2002 at yahoo.co.uk Wed Nov 3 23:54:16 2004 From: snapesangel2002 at yahoo.co.uk (laura) Date: Wed, 03 Nov 2004 23:54:16 -0000 Subject: Totally Obssessed - Found It! - Spinners End - Near BRISTOL! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117171 > bboyminn: > If you draw a straight line from just north of Weston-super-Mare (the > approx location of Spinners End) to Staines in North Surrey, you will > pass within 3 to 4 miles of the heart of Bristol. (my map has a > resolution of 16 miles to the inch; so best guess) > [snip] > Point: you seem to be looking for logical depth in something that is a > shallow connection at best. > > /A/ Spinners End is near Bristol: Hagrid flew near Bristol; make of it > what you will. > > Also, unless I'm mistaken, JKR used to live in and near Bristol, so > she might be familiar with the area. JKR grew up in Chepstow, not far from me (I live in Newport). I've just checked on the Route Planner at www.theaa.com , and Spinners End is in Weston-Super-Mare, 40 miles from Chepstow, and only 24 miles from Bristol. Like others, I think Spinners End is where Hagrid took Harry in those missing 24 hours. I've been wondering why JK has given us this particular chapter title, knowing we'd all be looking for its location. Is she giving us a clue or throwing us off scent? It's fun though ;) Laura* From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Thu Nov 4 00:54:00 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Thu, 04 Nov 2004 00:54:00 -0000 Subject: Was Harry designed as the Anti-LV weapon ? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117172 SSSusan wrote : " My only objection with the theory, then, would be the issue of why DD (or whomever it was in charge) would DO this. If they knew the necessary "ingredients," then why would they NEED to start from scratch w/ a baby? Why couldn't they apply the "stuff" [sorry--brain fade] to themselves? So I guess I'm wondering if you can flesh out that part of it." Del replies : I'm working on it, but it's not that obvious even to me :-) The main point would be that the "stuff" would require a blank slate to be applied to (a bit like when doctors (sometimes ?) have to suppress the immune system of someone before making a transplant). But I haven't worked out the details yet. I first wanted to see what kind of general objections people would have to such an idea, in order to determine if there was something that would drown it immediately. So far, I can counter all the objections I have received. Including yours :-) So I will get working on the details. Del From red_rider4 at lycos.com Thu Nov 4 00:53:39 2004 From: red_rider4 at lycos.com (Hester Griffith) Date: Thu, 04 Nov 2004 00:53:39 -0000 Subject: Felix Felicis In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117173 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "johnbowman19" wrote: > > Does anyone else remember when JK's door opened before this and gave > us the description of a man who looked like a lion? I believe it is a > description of Felix and that he is the new DADA teacher. Hester: So he would be a jovial leonine man? The description didn't really make me think "happy," but that doesn't mean much as it was a brief intro to a character. I've been thinking that it could be a chapter dealing with a more familiar cat. If, for instance something happens to Filch in a previous chapter and a remedy is found in this chapter Mrs. Norris would be pretty happy. I guess I'm just thinking this may be a red herring. Though it is fun to think it may be an important clue. Hester, who took for ever just to solve the riddle. I'm horrible with riddles, but they're sure fun to solve! From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Thu Nov 4 01:02:16 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Thu, 04 Nov 2004 01:02:16 -0000 Subject: Good moral core (Re: Dirty Harry/Clean Harry) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117174 SSSusan wrote : "I think you may be right about an inner urging, and I find it interesting that you think of that urging as being that LIMITS free will. For some, like me, *knowing* how something made him feel previously can actually be FREEING. How? It helps him understand what he wants to do next time. If he made a choice which made him feel proud or content or good all over, I don't see it as a *limiting* factor next time he's faced with an option. He might well feel *freed* by knowing he's going to feel positive if he makes a similar choice this time." Del replies : I agree partially. For normal, every day choices, this would work. But for the heroic choices, I have a problem. Those choices *ended up* being good ones because things always turned miraculously well. But things always came close to turning very bad. So either Harry is blind to the consequences his choices *would* have had if he weren't outrageously lucky (that's very possible, he's only a kid after all), or there's something inside him that blinds him to this aspect of his previous decisions when he has to make another one of the same kind. Example : Harry almost got himself and Ron killed when he insisted on following the spiders in the Forbidden Forest. Yet, a few months later, he makes almost a similar decision by deciding to go to the Chamber of Secrets with Ron and that almost useless Lockhart. Del From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Thu Nov 4 01:08:49 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Thu, 04 Nov 2004 01:08:49 -0000 Subject: Good moral core (Re: Dirty Harry/Clean Harry) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117175 SSSusan wrote : " what I'm arguing is that the moral compass may, to some degree, just "be there." " Del replies : In the realm of the Potterverse, this explanation would have a terrible consequence : if the moral compass can "just be there", then can it also "just not be there" ? Is Tom Riddle bad like Harry is good : because they are just that way ? Del From chnc1024 at AOL.COM Thu Nov 4 01:32:27 2004 From: chnc1024 at AOL.COM (chnc1024 at AOL.COM) Date: Wed, 3 Nov 2004 20:32:27 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Why were Harry's parents so rich? Message-ID: <15d.42e85583.2ebae0ab@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 117176 In a message dated 11/3/2004 12:40:51 PM Pacific Standard Time, steve at hp-lexicon.org writes: Steve wrote: Rowling said in an interview that James inherited his fortune, actually. There are some who like to imagine that since James' family came from Godric's Hollow, and that since Bowman Wright, the inventor of the Golden Snitch, was also from Godric's Hollow, that James is the heir to the Golden Snitch fortune. *************************************************** Chancie When you said this, that reminded me of when Harry is in Snape's pensive, and James is said to be playing with a snitch. Does anyone else think its odd that since James was a chaser, he had a snitch on hand??? Hmmmm..... Chancie [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From darkthirty at shaw.ca Thu Nov 4 01:34:18 2004 From: darkthirty at shaw.ca (Dan Feeney) Date: Thu, 04 Nov 2004 01:34:18 -0000 Subject: Good moral core (Re: Dirty Harry/Clean Harry) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117177 delwynmarch wrote: > As for Harry, he seems to repeatedly make instinctive decisions. Because those choices have good consequences, we don't wonder too much about them. But let's see things another way : what if Harry's decision to go after the Philosopher's stone had resulted in Hermione's or Ron's death ? What if Harry's decision to go after the spiders in CoS had resulted in Ron's death? What if Harry's decision to enter the Chamber of Secrets had resulted in his own death, in Ginny's death and in Diary!Tom's gaining a real body? And so on. In short, what if Harry's apparent good decisions had had bad consequences? Wouldn't we then wonder why he took such suicidal decisions, maybe even what was wrong with him? Neri wrote : > " How do you know, in your life, which decisions are right? OK, you might tell me that you frequently don't KNOW for sure which are the right decisions, you just do your best to choose right, and sometimes you get it wrong." Del replies : > But what's wrong with being the murderer of someone like Pettigrew? And what makes Harry think that he knows what his father would have wanted ? Wouldn't Sirius and Remus know better ? Also, what makes Harry think he has a right to stop Sirius from getting his revenge for those 12 years in Azkaban ? Again, Harry was right by my book, but we aren't told why he thinks that way. It's just "the right thing to do". But why ? I know why *I* think it was the right thing to do, but I don't know why Harry thinks so. > And the thing is : we do not know what his beliefs actually are. Del replies : > But doesn't that go against his free will? Now that he knows about the Prophecy, this knowledge will interfere with his decision-making. Because he knows he is The One, he might decide to do things he might not have done otherwise, or the other way around. Whether this means that he is more free or less free is not the point : the point is that his free will is now conditioned by his knowledge IMO. > In other words : IMO, free will is not really free. It is only free > within the limits your nature and your nurture have put on you. Dan: Well, continuing on in this thread, a couple more points to make. First, the fact that Rowling isn't telling us what Harry's "actual beliefs are" doesn't at all seem problematic for me. If I were trying to come up with some codified scale of values, some dogma for being good or right, perhaps it would bother me, or if I were trying to place Rowling's characters on some continuum of grace, perhaps, some arc of goodness - yet, even then, would rationalization get me anywhere? Would being able to rate expressed intentions and verifiable outcomes solve anything? They only seem to work in terms of economic planning and prediction, and only as rubrick, not as proof of objective. The attraction to Rowling for me is quite linked to the fact that neither her nor her characters explicate themselves or parse the consequences of their actions for our reading pleasure. And, as we watch them, begin to zero in on them as characters, the less they appear as simple embodiements of this or that moral stance. Their character, then, is not circumscribed by this or that belief they may or may not hold, or that other characters may or may not hold regarding them. Really, in some ways, it's quite anti-statist, quite like anarchism. This is lovely, not irritating. It's a kind of generosity in the telling, whereas, I think, to some it comes across as parsimony with "truth," as if truth were only and always how something is codified. This is pretty much philosophical idealism (as opposed to, like, "believing in a great and wonderful future" idealism.) Things are a certain way because we say they are, because we describe them such, and, what you think about an act you do has some effect on the outcome, even if it does not modify the act at all. (Which is mysticism, really.) Translating this to the question at hand, it seems to some, if I am reading them correctly, that Harry's actions cannot be anything until some rubric is added wherein Rowling SAYS they're something. Of course, I disagree. Wang Wei in front of the tanks at Tienamen Square is acting, and we will never know why he was there. That takes absolutely nothing away from this person returning home from shopping, seeing a row of tanks heading for the students, and standing in their way. In fact, in these kinds of cases, insistance on rationale seems irrelevant. Rowling does not privilege ideas or rationale in that way. In fact, knowledge itself is very problematic in her books. There's Hogwarts: A History, but it appears to tell us nothing about what being in Hogwarts is like, in the same way a military history of the Napoleonic Wars doesn't tell us anything about what being in Europe at the time was like. Knowledge is not static or final, either, in her books (to this point, anyway), though it appears to be possible to await finality like an approaching epiphany of sense and meaning, if you will. It may be unusual, may be quite different from insipid story-telling, but is it really so perplexing, so hard to ride the waves? Is there possibly a strain of expectation here that would not exist were the books not sold from the Children's book shelves? Regarding freedom - just as we cannot imagine an prison without reference to the peculiar and particular, so we cannot imagine freedom without the peculiar and particular. What I mean is, there are contingencies. That alone makes impossible the idea of absolute freedom. There is never a question of Harry, or anyone else, being absolutely free. But, contingencies also make prophecy impossible, at least for us. I agree that we do not know all the consequences of our actions. What I take from this, however, is not inaction, avoidance, despair. It is the greatest arrogance to think we are right about anything we do, or to think we can know all the consequences. It is only a check on this arrogance that our ignorance provides. Without this limitation, if we could see everything clearly... well, I can't imagine, I'm not some omnipotent diety. One would have to be able to think infinitely fast, on infinite levels.... So, Harry is doing this and that, like us. The dialogue, I suggest, is occuring between us and Rowling, her characters. In my last post, I described the processes as a testing, a kind of touching, as it were, our way among the novels. But they are a kind of Erised, and operate that way because she is not telling us what we see in the mirror - she is leaving that to us. Dan From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Thu Nov 4 02:21:34 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Thu, 04 Nov 2004 02:21:34 -0000 Subject: Good moral core (Re: Dirty Harry/Clean Harry) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117178 SSSusan wrote : > " what I'm arguing is that the moral compass may, to some degree, > just "be there." " Del replies : > In the realm of the Potterverse, this explanation would have a > terrible consequence : if the moral compass can "just be there", > then can it also "just not be there" ? > > Is Tom Riddle bad like Harry is good : because they are just that > way ? Well, now, that's a very good question. How did I get myself into this position?? :-) I was arguing the moral compass as being somewhat "just there" partly as a counter to the idea that it's an entire moral system that's been taught from without and which is referred to as if it were a chart ["Thou shalt not kill, thou shalt not steal, ..."]. Contrary to that, I think Harry's moral code has developed over years based upon some innate tendencies and the environment he found himself in and his *interest* in choosing for himself. For instance, his choices seem to be based in part on his desire to NOT be things--Dudley, the Dursleys, Draco, Voldemort, a Slytherin; that he's made a decision through watching & identifying of what it is he does NOT want to be. The "just there" is the only thing I could come up with for an explanation [ha--as if it were one] for why Harry's been able to look outward for another way of being & behaving, rather than blindly following the examples shown in the Dursleys, which many children would have done. So does this mean we're talking about some sort of innate predisposition? In part, I think so. I know this gets caught up with Neri's free will remarks, too, at some point. Once he's old enough for Hogwarts, he's starting to make more conscious decisions which I would say involve exercising free will. But as a young child I think the "just there" thing is the only way I can explain why in the world Harry was able to look outward for other ways of being, while other children would've just repeated the patterns they saw in their immediate environs. Help somebody! I'm talking in circles, I think. And what DOES this say about the *possibility* that a moral compass just *isn't* there for some? Would JKR buy into that? Siriusly Snapey Susan, with what has to be her weakest post in her time here! From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Thu Nov 4 02:34:39 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Thu, 04 Nov 2004 02:34:39 -0000 Subject: Good moral core (Re: Dirty Harry/Clean Harry) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117179 > SSSusan wrote : >> I know this gets caught up with Neri's free will remarks, too, at > some point. Once he's old enough for Hogwarts, he's starting to > make more conscious decisions which I would say involve exercising > free will. But as a young child I think the "just there" thing is > the only way I can explain why in the world Harry was able to look > outward for other ways of being, while other children would've just > repeated the patterns they saw in their immediate environs. > > Help somebody! I'm talking in circles, I think. And what DOES this > say about the *possibility* that a moral compass just *isn't* there > for some? Would JKR buy into that? Alla: Oh, you are not the only one :) I think I am thinking in circles too. Going back to starting this discussion, I think that one year of living with loving parents definitely made a difference in Harry "moral compass" showing the right ways. I am with you - we don't know for sure why Harry chooses what "right", but I am thinking that subconscious memories of at least getting some love from his parents plays important role in it. What if "moral compass" is not there? Well, according to JKR she believes that nobody is born evil, so I don't think that it is possible in "potterverse" From nkafkafi at yahoo.com Thu Nov 4 03:29:51 2004 From: nkafkafi at yahoo.com (nkafkafi) Date: Thu, 04 Nov 2004 03:29:51 -0000 Subject: Unreliable narrator - The Snape Timeline In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117180 > Steve wrote : > > First, while we are tracking Harry movements and know what is going > on, Snape does not have this knowledge. Once the leaves Umbridge's > office, all he knows is that Harry has been breaking school rules > again, gotten caught, and Harry seems to be under the unlikely belief > that Voldemort has Sirius in the Ministry of Magic. Something that > would be extremely difficult for anyone to believe. > > But just in case, Snape contacts Grimmauld Place and discovers Sirius > is safe and sound, in his mind, case closed. > Neri: So now Snape knows that Harry had a false vision from Voldemort. As a secret agent, shouldn't he wonder why is Voldemort sending Harry a false vision that will make him want to get to the DoM? And if Voldemort is trying to lure Harry to the DoM, might he also try supplying Harry with the means to get there? And might Umbridge be an agent of Voldemort, and do this for him? Wouldn't these suspicions merit, just to be on the safe side, finding out where is Harry, alerting HQ to the developing situation, and increasing the alertness of the guard in the DoM? We are talking about a war, after all, There have been several attacks already, and secret agents are paid to be distrustful and guarded, even slightly paranoid. > Steve : > So what does Snape do? He goes to his office, makes a nice cup of tea, > and sits back sipping it, savoring all the deliciously nasty things > Umbridge is likely to do to Harry and friends, all the while thinking > that the little brat deserves it for all the rules he breaks. About > time some one took him to task for this. > Neri: Where I served, an officer acting like this in such a situation would have been demoted to privet on the spot. > Steve : > Umbridge has Harry, Sirius is safe, certainly no need for panic and > indeed not even any real need to be concerned. Although, I'm sure > Snape is unaware of the depths to which Umbridge would stoop. Neri: The same Umbridge who had, just yesterday, commanded Ministry Aurors to attack and remove two Order members (Hagrid and McGonagall) from Hogwarts? No, how could the na?ve, inexperienced Snape ever imagine the depths that this Umbridge would stoop to? He apparently needs a refreshment course with Moody. How about writing "Constant Vigilance!" 10,000 times? > Steve : An hour > to a couple hours go by, and Snape finds out that Umbridge has taken > Harry and Hermione into the forest, and that some time after that, Ron > and Co manager to escape from Draco, and gone into (most likely) the > forest after them. I suspect he finds this out all at once after the > fact. Draco probably came running to Snape so he could whine and cry > on his shoulder. (Once he recovered from the Curse of the Bat Bogies > that is.) > > Certainly, at time for concern, but still no reason to panic. Harry > and Hermione are afteral in the company of an armed adult witch. The > situation could be unpleasant, but mostly for Harry at the hands of > Umbridge, so again, no reason for Snape to panic. Nothing to do but > wait for them to return, and fantasize about how many detentions Harry > will get for this little mess, or hopefully, expelled. Neri: So the boy who was very nearly assassinated by dementors just prior to this school year, and was consequently under heavy Order guard since then, now has been two hours in the Forbidden Forest with a suspicious Ministry worker who is a good friend of Lucius Malfoy and has the authority to order dementors. And several other kids are in the forest, with her or perhaps alone (Snape doesn't know which). And by now it is already dark time. And Snape is the only Order member at Hogwarts and HQ still know nothing about the new situation because he didn't bother updating them. But no cause for alarm, surely. > Steve : > Now another two hours goes by, and Snape is probably becoming > seriously concerned, but Umbridge is with them in the forest, and even > she wouldn't be stupid enough to wander too deeply into danger. > (Little does he know.) Eventually, he starts to think that perhaps > Harry found a way to get to London. But how? There are not likely to > be any Floo powered fires in the forest. He can't apparate. They might > have sneaked back to the school and taken a couple of brooms from the > Quidditch Broom Cupboard. But even at 100mph, assuming they could > withstand the cold for that long, it would take them over four hours > to get to London by broom. Neri: They could have reached Hogsmead in 20 minutes, use someone's fireplace and be at the DoM three hours ago. > Steve : > Now it's getting in the vicinity of midnight, plus or minus, and Snape > decides to tell the Order that Harry may still be attempting to get to > London. Again, cause for concern, but not necessarily panic. It's a > long trip from Hogwarts to London. At this time maybe Snape searches > the forest, maybe he didn't, doesn't matter because it doesn't affect > the timeline; that's been transfered to the Order. > > The Order thinks on the possibilities for a while, and decides that > perhaps, it might be best to check things out. Neri: OotP, Ch. 37: "Alastor Moody, Nymphadora Tonks, Kingsley Shacklebolt and Remus Lupin were at Headquarters when he made contact. All agreed to go to your aid at once." > Steve : > Sounds simple, but > under normal circumstances there should be a night guard at the > Ministry, and they need a good cover story for why a half a dozen of > them are barging in there in the middle of the night. Neri: During the previous months two Order guards in the DoM (Podmore and Arthur) were attacked on their post. One of them was imprioed and ended up in Azkaban and the other nearly died. If the current guard doesn't have an immediate way of communication with HQ, then DD should be demoted to privet together with Snape. The Order members could simply contact the guard and ask him to check things out, or try to contact him and find that he doesn't answer. Had Snape contacted HQ an hour or two before, just out of simple caution, the paranoid Moody would surely have checked on the guard, and the whole battle would have been prevented. If there wasn't an Order guard at the DoM that night, then Shacklebolt as a senior Auror certainly had the authority to check on the situation of the Ministry guards. > Steve : > It's important to put yourself outside the situation. We, as readers, > have great knowledge of what is actualy going on, but Snape and the > Order know nothing other than Umbridge took Harry and Hermione into > the forest on some unlikely and ill-conceived mission; Neri: Snape also knows that: 1. Harry was under a mind attack by Voldemort during daytime (not during his dreams). 2. Harry is in danger of being possessed by Voldemort. 3. Harry was attacked by dementors several months ago when the Order guard who was supposed to keep an eye on him deserted his post. 4. Harry saw Voldemort holding Sirius in the DoM, but Sirius is safe in 12GP. 5. Harry is troubled about this vision enough to take the risk of breaking into Umbridge's office. 6. There is something in the DoM that Voldemort wants very badly (we don't know if Snape also knows that Harry is the other person who can retrieve this thing, but it's probable. Snape was unnerved and very angry during the Occlumency lessons when Harry discovered about the DoM and when he passed through the door). 7. Two Order guards were already attacked during the last year when Voldemort's agents tried to infiltrate into the DoM. One of these attacks happened when Harry had a vision from Voldemort's mind. 8. Snape is the only Order member left at Hogwarts at the moment. The two other Order members were attacked and removed from Hogwarts by Umbridge just the day before. At no time during the last year were the Order's defenses at Hogwarts so thin, and Voldemort probably knows about it (Draco had a day to send an owl to his father, even if his father doesn't know this already from Fudge or Umbridge). DD is apparently not available. If there was a convenient time during this whole year for Voldemort to act at Hogwarts, it is NOW. Even if Secret Agent Snape failed to see where some of these things point to, elementary caution should have prompted him, at the very least, to find out what Umbridge did with Harry, to update HQ about the situation, and to ask them to check on the guard in the DoM. Not doing any of these for several hours is, dare I say it, slightly irresponsible. Neri From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Thu Nov 4 03:30:01 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Thu, 04 Nov 2004 03:30:01 -0000 Subject: Snape and Magic Dishwasher. Was: Re: DD and the rat: In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117181 Carol earlier: > > > I don't dispute your point that there's something odd about Scabbers from the beginning. I just don't think Ron's (and the rule-loving Percy's) having him as a pet is a violation of the rules--though it may bend them a little. > > Finwitch: > > The list of pets are suggestions, not rules. The pets found on the > list are indeed pets most likely to be found - with Owl and Cat on the list, Brown or Patil didn't dare bring her rabbit along. (Some > owls/cats EAT rabbits, you know). > Carol: Exactly. As I said in the portion of the post that you snipped, "We're never told that first-years can't bring rats (only brooms are expressly forbidden, and McGonagall gets around that one). They [rats]'re just not on the list of pets that first-years are likely to bring." I also listed dogs as pets that were unsuitable but not expressly forbidden and Lee Jordan's tarantula as a pet that was permitted but not on the list. IOW, rats are not forbidden, any more than tarantulas are. They're just not on the list. I was conceding that having a rat *might* bend the rules a little, but my main point was that the list is not exclusive. Or, as you put it, the list is a suggestion, not a rule. (The only rule, IMO, is the limit of one pet per student--note the capitalized ORs. If a student brings a cat *and* an owl, one of them, probably the owl, will be sent home.) Carol From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Thu Nov 4 04:13:16 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Thu, 04 Nov 2004 04:13:16 -0000 Subject: Is Harry a Metamorphmagus? In-Reply-To: <200410270034203.SM01260@DEVBOX> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117182 Kim wrote: > > > > First, Vivamus, where did you find out that JKR said that the 3 kids wouldn't become animagi? I believe it -- just wondered where you heard or read it. > Vivamus answered: > I'm afraid I can't pin it down, exactly, as it was too long ago, but I'm quite sure I read it, and I'm fairly sure it was a direct quote. Carol: As you probably know, I'm behind on posting, so maybe someone else has posted the quote, but I haven't seen it farther down the thread, so here goes. It's in a Sugarquill interview dated 20 October 1999 (mysteriously filed under 2000 at the Leaky Cauldron): http://www.quick-quote-quill.org/articles/1999/1099-pressclubtransc.html "SB: We're going to take a few more questions, and um, the next one is will Harry ever turn into a shape-changer like his father? "JKR: Animagus. No, Harry's not in training to be an animagus, and if you've read book three, you won't know-?um, that's a wizard that's very, very difficult to do. They learn to turn themselves into animals. No, Harry is not, Harry is going to be concentrated elsewhere, he's not going to have time to do that. He's got quite a full agenda coming up, poor boy." So clearly Harry is not going to become an animagus (no indication whether that applies to Ron or Hermione, but they haven't shown any inclination in that direction). Thw wording of the question ("Will Harry ever turn into a shape-changer," suggests that he won't become a metamorphmagus, either, but JKR's quick correction of the terminology casts a smidgen of doubt on that reading. However, as others have argued, Harry's accidental magic has only altered his appearance once, and it didn't alter his apparent identity; it only restored his normal appearance. So I don't think Harry has any inborn skill as a metamorphmagus and the argument that the doesn't have time to become an animagus applies to becoming a maetmorphmagus using spells or potions as well. I think we'll see more of Tonks in this role, but something altogether different and unexpected from Harry. Carol, hoping she's not duplicating anyone and noting that it's quite easy to find interview quotes at the Leaky Cauldron From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Thu Nov 4 04:44:37 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Thu, 04 Nov 2004 04:44:37 -0000 Subject: why did Voldie attack the Potter on Halloween? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117183 Hester wrote: > > Maybe Nick was beheaded on Halloween for the same reason it is an > important holiday in the WW, or maybe he was beheaded by dark wizards and they like to perform execution on Halloween. Maybe there is some kind of benefit magically for performing an execution on Halloween. > > Carol responds: If we trust JKR's site and consider deleted scenes as semicanonical, Sir Nick was beheaded by Muggles (he was asked by a woman who knew he was a wizard to straighten her teeth but when he gave her a tusk instead and couldn't undo his mistake, he was executed). The "ballad" on this topic (wisely deleted by the editor) is in the Extra Stuff section under Characters. At any rate, the timing of the execution at Halloween seems to be mere coincidence. There's no connection with WW celebrations, and Sir Nick seems to be living among Muggles. Carol From chnc1024 at AOL.COM Thu Nov 4 04:46:48 2004 From: chnc1024 at AOL.COM (chnc1024 at AOL.COM) Date: Wed, 3 Nov 2004 23:46:48 EST Subject: JKR done with HBP??? Message-ID: <1da.2e89d7e5.2ebb0e38@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 117184 Chancie: I have just read something, and it kinda confused me ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ JKR: evil wizards have infiltrated the internet and put on there that the title of book 4 is ?Harry Potter and the Quidditch World Cup?, and that?s not true. They?re just messing with your mind! [laughter] It?s not true at all. But I?m not going to tell you the title; cause I?m a bit superstitious about that, I like to keep it a secret until the book?s finished. http://www.quick-quote-quill.org/articles/1999/1099-pressclubtransc.html Press Club 20 October 1999 J.K. Rowling Interview Transcript Transcript Courtesy Sugarquill.net's Transcription Project ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Was her superstition just for book for or all of the books. Some one already asked if the chapters names were the last things to be decided, so does that mean that she is finished with Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince?!?1?!?!?!? Chancie~who's trying not to get too excited [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From willsonkmom at msn.com Thu Nov 4 04:56:29 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Thu, 04 Nov 2004 04:56:29 -0000 Subject: Chapter 29, Career Advice - Broken Potion In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117185 "mcmaxslb" wrote: > > I can't believe what I have read in this thread. Of course the > greasy git broke it on purpose! You Snape lovers have gone to far > this time. Snape is a complete and total asshole that takes out his > petty schoolboy grudges on a child to the extent that he undermines > the cause that he is fighting for! I hope that after Harry destroys > Voldemort he give Snivellus the beat down he deserves! Potioncat: So,erm, you don't like Snape? OK. It doesn't matter if a reader believes Snape broke it, or Draco broke it or it fell by happen chance....we all have dearly held and unchangable opinions. But none of us know who broke it. Unless some character from the book is given the line, "I saw Professor Snape break the flask," we could not convict Snape in a court of law. OK, someone stop me before I post on this thread again. From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Thu Nov 4 05:12:45 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Thu, 04 Nov 2004 05:12:45 -0000 Subject: Chapter 29, Career Advice - Broken Potion In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117186 > Potioncat: > So,erm, you don't like Snape? > > OK. It doesn't matter if a reader believes Snape broke it, or Draco > broke it or it fell by happen chance....we all have dearly held and > unchangable opinions. But none of us know who broke it. > > Unless some character from the book is given the line, "I saw > Professor Snape break the flask," we could not convict Snape in a > court of law. > > OK, someone stop me before I post on this thread again. Alla: You have boldly gone to where no man have gone before , Potioncat. :o) You dared to defend your favourite character. How dare you? :) Unfortunately, there is a possibility that Snape could be convicted in the court of law. Even with circumstantial evidence, it is possible. It all depends on how skilled the lawyer for prosecution will be (Trust me on this one :)) I guess I now broke my unspoken vow. Now I have to go and punish myself. Bad Alla, very bad Alla. :) From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Thu Nov 4 05:35:26 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Thu, 04 Nov 2004 05:35:26 -0000 Subject: Lupin's mind powers was Re: DD and the rat: Conspiracy theories compared [LONG] In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117187 Carol earlier: > > But I didn't mean to get into an anti-conspiracy theory > discussion again. I'm only wondering what evidence you have > that Lupin has talent as a Legilimens.< > > Pippin responded: > > All references PoA: > > In chapter 8, Lupin believes that Harry's boggart would have > been Voldemort, although Harry himself has forgotten that he > thought of Voldemort first. Carol again: Thanks, Pippin. But wouldn't the thought that Harry's boggart was Voldemort be just a natural assumption? I think Snape or McGonagall or any non Legilimens would have assumed the same thing. (And Snape may have assumed that Neville's boggart would be a DE, also terrifying for the class. Unfortunately for him, it turned out to be himself!) > > In chapter 10, Harry is unable to ask his question about why > dementors affect him so strongly, but Lupin answers it, "as > though he had read Harry's mind." > > In chapter 17, Lupin is shown "staring so intently at Black it > seemed he was trying to read his mind." Carol: Yes. We have similar statements regarding Snape, but no solid evidence of Legilimency (beyond Snape's Legilimens spell) for either of them. And of course, we also have the unreliable narrator, who as usual is giving us Harry's perception rather than fact. Note "as though" and "seemed" in the quotes. > Pippin: > There are also hints that Lupin is an Occlumens. > > In chapter 14, Lupin's face assumes an "odd, closed" > expression as he contemplates the map. > > In chapter 19, Snape says, "Don't ask me to fathom the way a > werewolf's mind works." > > Granted none of that is proof, but now that we know some > characters have mind powers, is it really far-fetched to suppose > that the text hints that Lupin is one of them? "Odd, closed" > seems especially obvious. > Carol: Hm. I agree that Lupin is guarding his secrets closely, hence the closed expression, but not that he's using Occlumency to hide them from Harry, who is not a Legilimens and can't detect Lupin's emotions or see his memories (the connection with Voldemort is different and not yet fully in effect). As for Snape's werewolf comment, he's just being Snape, spiteful and angry at the moment. The earlier scene with the Marauder's Map, where both Lupin and Snape are being cagey and concealing the MWPP connection from Harry, shows that he and Lupin understand one another quite well. I don't think there's any need for either of them to use Occlumency or Legilimency, just what they know about each other communicated in a way that outsiders, including Harry, will not understand. As I said earlier, if Lupin knew Occlumency, I doubt very much that he would have told Harry that Snape is a superb Occlumens. He would have offered to teach Harry himself, finding some way to get around the werewolf, erm, inconvenience. Or Sirius would have volunteered Lupin's services instead of offering the unhelpful suggestion that Snape might try to harm Harry. AFAWK, Occlumency is a rare talent and Legilimency even rarer. Snape is an Occlumens, Voldy is a Legilimens, DD is certainly a Legilimens and probably an Occlumens as well. (IMO, it makes much more sense for him to be Snape's teacher than for Voldy to teach any DE a skill that could be used against him.) Anyway, thanks for presenting your evidence. I'm inclined to be skeptical--not at all through Faith in the narrator as the Voice of the Author but from a profound distrust in his or her *limited* omniscience, which I see as a very shaky basis for conspiracy theories or speculation. I think we need to choose our evidence very carefully, speech and actions that don't depend on Harry's perception. And even then, as the incident with the broken vial shows, we're still supplying omitted actions not supplied by the narrator that suit our own preconceptions of Snape. No doubt we do the same thing for Lupin and Black and Pettigrew and HRH and Dumbledore. Carol, noting here even though it's the wrong thread that not everyone is a fan of Time-Turning theories! From psychobirdgirl at yahoo.com Thu Nov 4 06:04:59 2004 From: psychobirdgirl at yahoo.com (psychobirdgirl) Date: Thu, 04 Nov 2004 06:04:59 -0000 Subject: JKR done with HBP??? In-Reply-To: <1da.2e89d7e5.2ebb0e38@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117188 I would be willing to bet that JK is in fact done with HBP, but that doesn't mean that it is anywhere near ready, it will still need to be edited and published and all that. Also, maybe she released the title of the book earlier this time around because at this point the title is kind of set, along with most of the story line, and probably even the more important chapter titles, because the series is almost done and she can't really change most of the names because of the way the names tie into the story, kind of inevitable really, at least it would seem that way based on the fact that she said the story came to her fully formed. psychobirdgirl From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Thu Nov 4 06:08:14 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Thu, 04 Nov 2004 06:08:14 -0000 Subject: Transfiguration vs. charms (Was: Is Harry a Metamorphmagus?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117189 Finwitch wrote: > >Also: how did he turn his teacher's wig blue? What area of magic does that belong, or was it Harry at all (I sure can imagine Dudley to put dye into it and blame Harry)? ... He made the sweater shrink.< > > Kim responded: > > Wouldn't those be examples of transfiguration, like when Harry made > the glass in the snake's cage disappear in SS/PS? He "transfigured" > an inanimate object into something else, as in making a brown(?) wig > into a blue wig, a big sweater into a smaller sweater, or turning a > sheet of glass into air. If you can transfigure your own > appearance at will, you're a Metamorphmagus. If you can transfigure > yourself into an animal, you're an Animagus. They all seem to be > part of the same basic ability. And some folks are just naturally > better at it than others. Carol notes: I agree that the last two examples are clearly transfiguration, turning something into something else. Both are unusual in not requiring a wand or a spell and are very advanced magic, the first apparently requiring natural ability, the second a lot of practice (and quite possibly natural talent as well--note that James's wand seems to have chosen him for his skill in Transfiguration.) But turning a wig blue or shrinking a sweater doesn't change the nature of the object, only some property like its color or size. I think that Harry in those cases was performing the wandless equivalent of a charm, much less difficult than even elementary Transfiguration, such as changing a hedgehog into a pincushion, as far as I can determine. (There are, of course, complex charms like the Fidelius Charm and the protective magic performed on Baby Harry, but that's not what we're talking about here.) Transfiguration turns something into something else; Charms act on the object without changing its essence: hover charm, summoning charm, banishing charm, etc. IMO, changes in size and color fit the second category rather than the first. (Tonks, however, changes the *shape* of her nose, which remains a nose but not her own nose, so that would probably qualify as Transfiguration, not a wandless Charm.) Carol, who thought she had it all figured out but now is not entirely sure where Transfiguration begins and Charms leaves off From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Thu Nov 4 06:26:40 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Thu, 04 Nov 2004 06:26:40 -0000 Subject: Lupin's mind powers was In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117190 Olivier (citing evidence of Lupin's Legilimency) wrote: > And if I might add, in chapter 8 PoA, Harry thinks "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 already seemed to think he couldn't cope with a boggart." > > And then, the punch line "Something of Harry's thoughts seemed to have shown on his face, because Lupin said, "Anything worrying you, Harry?"" > > Note that if one admits that Lupin is a Legilimens, one can surmise that Lupin knows Sirius' first aim is not to kill Harry since the dog did not attack Harry. Carol responds: I don't see any indication that Lupin read an image of Sirius in Harry's mind--at this time he still believes that Sirius murdered Peter and betrayed the Potters. Maybe he's just skilled at reading facial expressions and can see that something is troubling Harry. And of course we have yet another ironic missed opportunity for Harry to pass on information to someone else. Harry is misinterpreting Lupin's view of him (note the "seemed"), and Harry fails to confide in him as he fails to confide in Ron and Dumbledore and Sirius and just about everybody. If Lupin had known through Legilimency that Sirius was showing up in dog form on Privet Drive, he might have gone to Dumbledore and confessed the truth about MWPP. Better for Lupin, who might have kept his job. Better for Ron, who would have been saved a scare and a broken leg. Better for Harry, since he wouldn't have had to face the Dementors. Then again, Harry needed to face the Dementors to prepare him for OoP. And I'm not so sure that it would have been better for Sirius, either, since he might not have been given a chance to turn Scabbers into Peter. In any case, I don't see any Legilimency, just a teacher who recognizes a student's discomfort and tries to put him at his ease but fails to gain his full confidence. Carol From kelsey_dangelo at yahoo.com Thu Nov 4 05:57:33 2004 From: kelsey_dangelo at yahoo.com (Kelsey Dangelo) Date: Wed, 3 Nov 2004 21:57:33 -0800 (PST) Subject: Was Harry designed as the Anti-LV weapon ? In-Reply-To: <1099469310.4257.54040.m25@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <20041104055733.29847.qmail@web53104.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 117191 Kelsey: Here's one of my problems with the prophesy-literary-function. Personally, I was disappointed that the prophesy was the answer to the BIG question "Why does Voldie want to kill Harry?" It seemed to be a cop-out (but I don't have a problem with it following literary tradition). Prophesies are tricky. People can't tell if the prophesy is predicting the future or causing the future. Would Harry defeat the Dark Lord if it hadn't been for the prophesy? Would Oedipus killed his father and married his mother if it hadn't been for the prophesy? It's impossible to tell. The Fates may have set it up, or they may just be just another word for what was already determined by who Voldie and Harry were. Free will or none, Parental planning or none, Oracle or none, it seems like that's the way things are. Basically, it turns into a mobieous strip of logic. Kelsey, who like prophesies, but not in the Potterverse and is sorry if she stumbled off the thread. From jlnbtr at yahoo.com Thu Nov 4 04:00:09 2004 From: jlnbtr at yahoo.com (Juli) Date: Wed, 3 Nov 2004 20:00:09 -0800 (PST) Subject: Why were Harry's parents so rich? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041104040009.20763.qmail@web53109.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 117192 --- Lucy wrote: > Just thinking, when Harry first goes to his vault in > Gringotts, he realises he has tons of money that his > parents left him. Where did they get so much money > because he seems embarrassed about it in front of > lots of people apart from the Weasleys. Where do you > think they got it? Did they have unknown well paid > jobs? I believe James inherited a large sum of money just like Sirius did. That's why they could *work* full time at the Order during VWI. They had more than enough money to live their lives and to leave their son. Although they were very talented I don't think they ever got a paid job. Juli From jlnbtr at yahoo.com Thu Nov 4 04:09:51 2004 From: jlnbtr at yahoo.com (Juli) Date: Wed, 3 Nov 2004 20:09:51 -0800 (PST) Subject: Dementors in Little Whinging In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041104040951.95344.qmail@web53108.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 117193 --- Glavgirl wrote: > In OOTP we learned that Umbridge had ordered the > Dementors to Little Whinging. Since she was working > at the MoM at the time, would the ministry not have > a record of someone ordering them? No more mention > was made about it after Harry's hearing. Are we > going to find out in HBP that the Minister actually > finds out about Umbridge and the dementors? It almost > appears like she is one of Voldemort's Death Eaters > instead of a Ministry official. She got along well > with Draco and his cronies in Slytherin. Could > Umbridge be one of Voldemort's?? Juli: I remember that during OoP when Sirius was talking to the Trio in the chimney, Ron suggested she could be a Death Eater, but he replied that just because she's mean she's not necessarily a DE. The reason she sent the dementors over to Harry's was to get him kicked out of Hogwarts. I believe the reason she got along so well with Draco and the Slytherins is because they must have been ordered by their DE fathers to make her life as easy as possible, not as a support for the MoM, but as a way to get Dumbledore out of Hogwarts, which did work. Juli From kelsey_dangelo at yahoo.com Thu Nov 4 06:29:51 2004 From: kelsey_dangelo at yahoo.com (Kelsey Dangelo) Date: Wed, 3 Nov 2004 22:29:51 -0800 (PST) Subject: Harry's moral core vs. Voldie's In-Reply-To: <1099469310.4257.54040.m25@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <20041104062951.68845.qmail@web53109.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 117194 Neri: > > At 15, Tom Riddle was a talented student, a good-looking boy, a prefect, highly appreciated by both his teachers and his classmates. It was his choice. Alla: > > No, he did not have to do all that and I have no sympathy whatsoever towards the choices he made. Moreover, I have less trouble understanding why Tom Riddle made them than why Harry did. Tom hated his father with all his heart and perhaps his sociopathy went from there. But what made Harry's free will to work that way? He clearly made his choices earlier than he was eleven. Why? bboyminn: > But I don't think the key is that he hated is father, as much as it is WHY he hated his father. Tom Riddle - abandoned and denied by his father before and after his birth. Harry Potter - whose mother and father sacrificed themselves out of love for their child. While we can easily find similarities between the two, I think the above defines the critical difference between the two. One was left with the bitter impression that he was worthless, the other was valued more highly than life itself. In addition, Harry did at least get 18 month of nurturing love before he lost his parents.>> Kelsey: I agree with everything the above people have said about the motives and differences between Harry and Voldie, determining their differences in how they use their free will towards different ends. As well as how their situations were the same, yet different. [my personal tendency is that their situations were the same, its their moral cores and choices that are different] But remember, Harry didnt know that his parents sacrificed their lives for him until he was 11 years old. And he didnt really know the full extent of that until his third year. And we dont know the circumstances of the death of Toms Slytherin-heir mother (who fell in love with a Muggle). [insert outrageous theory about her sacrificial death here]. I think that, deep in the psyche of these two children, the abandonment issues are _about_ equal. Both needed care, attention, and love at a young age, and it shows later in their lives when they desire attention at Hogwarts, and then the differences exist in how they seek to gain that attention. Granted Harry hates the attention from his ill-won-fame (defeating the Dark Lord the first time), but he desperately seeks to prove himself (another form of fame). So, heres my question. JKR has said that Voldie has never loved nor ever will love anyone. That he cant. [hence why he cant tolerate Harrys love for Sirius or Lilys love for Harry] Im all for him being a flat, two-dimensional evil villain figure (hatred, darkness, anger, the anti-thesis of Harry, the hero). But this, I cant quite grasp. Why would he care if his father abandoned him if he never loved him at all? Why would he care about gaining attention or power or followers? If Voldie lacks that ability to love, I guess he cant really be molded by his nurturing, but that its part of his nature (i.e. he never had the ability, so it could never be developed). Oh, wow. Epiphany coming through (possibly)! Maybe its love (capacity for and ability to) that is that infamous "moral core/moral choices" difference between Harry and Voldie. And if thats true, then Harry cant go against that moral core and do something morally wrong (i.e. murder, blood-baths, etc.) to become "Dirty Harry" [the grandfather of this thread] and defeat Voldie. Hes going to have to do something morally sound through love to defeat Voldie. Kelsey, who apologizes if it sounds like shes talking to herself. From jlnbtr at yahoo.com Thu Nov 4 04:28:34 2004 From: jlnbtr at yahoo.com (Juli) Date: Wed, 3 Nov 2004 20:28:34 -0800 (PST) Subject: The only one he ever feared? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041104042834.59641.qmail@web53102.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 117195 > Juli wrote: > > What I'm thinking is WHY would a grown wizard fear > a one year old baby? prophecy or not, what could he do? > Harry didn't defeat or whatever LV the first time, it > was Lily, she's the one that left that ancient magic > that made the AK backfire. > > Kim now: > But you're right, Harry didn't actually defeat LV > the first time, it was Lily that defeated LV (via Harry). > I wonder, did LV see something in Lily's green eyes during > earlier battles -- was he attracted to something there? Juli: I'm thinking about what you just wrote, maybe one of the three times the Potters faced LV and got away, he may have seen something in her eyes, I don't think it could be love, it could have been that same power Harry has, and as he is not able to handle it (as we saw during the brief possession at the MoM) and hates it, so he could have thought: I'll kill him now while he's a baby and his power's not fully developed. As he knew Lily also had the power, that's why he was reluctant to kill her, he may have known she was too much for him, but because she sacrificed herself for Harry, he was able to kill her but not Harry. Am I making any sense? Juli From finwitch at yahoo.com Thu Nov 4 07:38:44 2004 From: finwitch at yahoo.com (finwitch) Date: Thu, 04 Nov 2004 07:38:44 -0000 Subject: Is Harry a Metamorphmagus? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117196 Carol: > As you probably know, I'm behind on posting, so maybe someone else has > posted the quote, but I haven't seen it farther down the thread, so > here goes. It's in a Sugarquill interview dated 20 October 1999 > (mysteriously filed under 2000 at the Leaky Cauldron): > > http://www.quick-quote-quill.org/articles/1999/1099- pressclubtransc.html -snip the quote - (and I tell you, it's also in Lexicon). > So clearly Harry is not going to become an animagus (no indication > whether that applies to Ron or Hermione, but they haven't shown any > inclination in that direction). Thw wording of the question ("Will > Harry ever turn into a shape-changer," suggests that he won't become a > metamorphmagus, either, but JKR's quick correction of the terminology > casts a smidgen of doubt on that reading. > > However, as others have argued, Harry's accidental magic has only > altered his appearance once, and it didn't alter his apparent > identity; it only restored his normal appearance. So I don't think > Harry has any inborn skill as a metamorphmagus and the argument that > the doesn't have time to become an animagus applies to becoming a > maetmorphmagus using spells or potions as well. > > I think we'll see more of Tonks in this role, but something altogether > different and unexpected from Harry. Finwitch: Restored. Healed? Anyway, this thing about 'becoming metamorhpmagus' - it's something one is born with, though it apparently requires practice to control it. Still, I wouldn't put it past Harry to uncontrollably use metamorphmagi to extend his arm or something like that. (I wonder - has he done it to catch the Snitch yet and no one noticed, because it was so fast?) On the other note, becoming a phoenix: Harry seems to *restore* his appearance quite often. For a phoenix to be reborn out of ashes, it's ultimate restorance of ones body. And, Harry's also to be said fast, natural flier (again, sounds like a phoenix). Harry also shows being able to move somewhat heavy loads (how far he took his trunk alone in PoA before waving down the Knight Bus?) His wand-core is that of a phoenix. (what else WOULD do if he's to be one himself?) Apparently Harry still has things to learn, but... I think he will be a phoenix. And that's not ANIMAGI - it's what he will be after he dies, and in a way, his soul has always BEEN a phoenix. Finwitch From gbannister10 at aol.com Thu Nov 4 07:51:06 2004 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Thu, 04 Nov 2004 07:51:06 -0000 Subject: Totally Obssessed - Found It! - Spinners End - Near BRISTOL! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117197 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Steve" wrote: bboyminn: > > Hate to sound like a broken record, but I still think you are looking > too deep for something that isn't there. There is no grand conspiracy > or deep revelation. Geoff: Agreed. Two weeks or so ago, Spinners End wasn't even in the frame. Suddenly, we all want to know about Spinners End and, equally suddenly, SE is linked with Hagrid's journet to bring Harry to Little Whinging.... So the question is posed, who put the two together? > Hargrid flew near Bristol: /A/, maybe not /THE/ but /A/, Spinners End > is near Bristol. Discuss. > > If you draw a straight line from just north of Weston-super-Mare (the > approx location of Spinners End) to Staines in North Surrey, you will > pass within 3 to 4 miles of the heart of Bristol. (my map has a > resolution of 16 miles to the inch; so best guess) > > Now I've never been to Bristol, but if you go to the heart of > Minneapolis and drive 3 to 4 miles in any direction, you are still in > the city. Given that people don't speak in absolutes, Hagrid might > seen 3 to 4 miles from the heart of the city as 'flew over Bristol'. Geoff: I travelled into Bristol quite frequently until a couple of years ago living only an hour and a half's drive away. Bristol is a fairly compact city, spreading out more to the north. Setting out from Weston-super-Mare which, for non-UK folk, is a well- known seaside town south of the city on the Bristol Channel, he would be more likely to find himself flying over Bath. However, I still think the whole matter is pure speculation and the link between Godric's Hollow and Spinners End is very tenuous. Geoff http://www.aspectsofexmoor.com From bboyminn at yahoo.com Thu Nov 4 08:02:52 2004 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Thu, 04 Nov 2004 08:02:52 -0000 Subject: Unreliable narrator - The Snape Timeline In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117198 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "nkafkafi" wrote: > > ...edited... > > Neri: > > Snape also knows that: > > 1. Harry was under a mind attack by Voldemort during daytime (not > during his dreams). > BBoyminn: No Harry's not, or at least Snape has no way of knowing that. All Snape has is a vague message from Harry that /he's got Padfoot that the place where it's hidden/; no more, no less. Well, that and the fact that Umbridge caught Harry breaking into her office. WE THE READERS have more information, and some of us with our superior knowledge knew something /dodgy/ was up, but many of us didn't even figure it out until after the fact. Snape doesn't know how or why Harry thinks /he's got Padfoot that the place where it's hidden/. And any reasonable analysis of the possibility would reach the same conclusion as Hermione, that it was extremely unlikely. Harry is where he should be, Sirius is where he should be, given the knowledge that is available, certainly there is cause for concern, but there is hardly enough evidence for serious concern, and certainly not enough for panic. > 2. Harry is in danger of being possessed by Voldemort. > Bboyminn: Again, that's not a known fact. Dumbledore and the Order which includes Snape /suspect/ that Voldemort might use the scar link to spy on Harry, or possibly try and influence him. But that is all far short of /possession/. This idea that Voldemort can /possess/ Harry via the scar link, is an overblown idea perpetuated by rabid fans (much like myself). The scar link gives Voldemort and Harry an strong intuitive sense of each others feelings. When the link is very open and receptive, they have a more empathic sense of each others feelings. When they, especially Harry, are asleep and in a vulnerable mental state, the strongest thoughts and feelings of one can manifest themselves as dreams in the other. But that's about the extent of what we have seen so far. People using the word 'possession' are far overstating the facts. Example: When Harry is about to Portkey to 12 Grimmauld Place, and he and Dumbledore look into each other's eyes. Harry feel a sense of a snake rising up inside himself, and feels the desire to strike out at Dumbledore. Why? Just as Voldemort obssessions are transferred to Harry as thoughts, so to in the moment are Harry's thoughts and feelings transferred back to Voldemort. But I find it extremely unlikely that Voldemort is seen through Harry's eyes. More likely, Harry has a strong emotional response to finally looking into Dumbledore's eyes, that puts Dumbledore in the forefront of Harry's thoughts and emotions. On Voldemort's end, he simply thinks of and perhaps has a mental image of Dumbledore in his mind. That triggers strong anti-Dumbledore emotions in Voldemort which in turn are transmitted back to Harry. Harry senses Voldemort hatred of and desire to kill Dumbledore. Voldemort isn't possessing Harry, he is simply projecting his hatefilled feeling toward Dumbledore back to Harry, and in the moment probably doing so unintensionally. It is highly unlikely that either of them at that point understand why they felt what they did at that particular moment. I suspect that only upon later reflection does Voldemort figure out how tight the connection between him and Harry is. > 3. Harry was attacked by dementors several months ago when the Order > guard who was supposed to keep an eye on him deserted his post. > bboyminn: And at the moment, Harry is not under attack, he is in the castle in the custody of a teacher, as well as in the presents of his friends and several other students, the Order has been contacted, and Sirius is safe. Everyone is where they are suppose to be and all is in order. Umbridge catching and punishing, and possibly expelling Harry, is just a nice little bonus to Snape. In addition, Snape has absolutely no way of making a connection between the earlier Dementor attack and Umbridge. At the moment, Umbridge, while a nasty piece of work, is still the headmaster of the school, and has ever right to take into custody and punish a student, Harry, for breaking into her office. > 4. Harry saw Voldemort holding Sirius in the DoM, but Sirius is safe > in 12GP. > bboyminn: Again, Snape doesn't know that, WE, the READERS, know that, but Snape doesn't. All Snape knows is that Harry thinks /he's got Padfoot that the place where it's hidden/. Snape contacted the Order, and verified that Sirius was safe and sound at home. > 5. Harry is troubled about this vision enough to take the risk of > breaking into Umbridge's office. > bboyminn: Remember this is Snape we are talking about. To him Potter has no reservations about breaking the rules, wander out to or into places he shouldn't be. He's done this all before. Snape knows Harry broke into the office, but he has little or no information as to why Harry did this or what his objective was in doing so. Harry is troubled about Sirius, but Snape has already confirmed that Sirius is at home; case closed. Nothing left but the joy of Harry having to sit another one of Umbridge's detentions. > 6. There is something in the DoM that Voldemort wants very badly ... > bboyminn: That is definitely true. But how does it come into play? Certainly, it cause for concern. But Harry is in the castle in the company of a large assortment of people. Doesn't really matter in that specific moment where Voldemort is or what he is doing, as long as he's not at Hogwarts. Remember, Snape has a much larger role to play in this war. It would be extremely unwise for him to blow is cover as a spy simply because Harry was, as he so often is, in trouble again. Snape needs to keep his eye on the big picture and consider the greater good (or bad, depending on your opinion) he can do. > 7. Two Order guards were already attacked during the last year when > Voldemort's agents tried to infiltrate into the DoM. One of these > attacks happened when Harry had a vision from Voldemort's mind. > bboyminn: Actually, three people were attack; two Order members and one Ministry employee. Podmore was put under the Imperius Curse which is a very subtle curse that's not immediately detectable. People under the curse go about their daily lives. Podmore could have been curse several days before in the middle of a common work day. It was only on that particular night that the influence of the curse forced him to act. Bode, who actually know how to get through the doors, was also under the Imperius Curse, which could have been cast at any time of the day or night, and at any time prior to his actions. The time lapse in these cases between cause and effect can be great or at least significant. That time delay sort of minimizes any sense of urgency. The third was when Voldemort himself entered the Ministry at night while possessing the snake which attacked Arthur Weasley. Harry did dream about this, but he dreamed about it because of Voldemort's heightened emotional state and Harry's heighted state of vulnerability. This was not a conscious effort by Voldemort. It is at this time that people (Dumbledore, etc...) become concerned that the link between Harry and Voldemort is becoming too strong, and now that Voldemort is aware of it, he may try to exploit it. But how he might exploit it is subject to many possibilities and much speculation. > 8. Snape is the only Order member left at Hogwarts at the moment. > The two other Order members were attacked and removed from Hogwarts > by Umbridge just the day before. ...edited.. > bboyminn: Snipped the part where you speculate that people at the school might have been keeping Voldemort informed about the schools growing vulnerability, and I suspect that's true. If nothing else, then Draco's letters home. But, I don't think that is so relevant. Once Voldemort becomes aware of the link, he concentrates on exploiting it. I think he is constantly, day and night, searching his own awareness for a vulnerability is Harry's state of mind. When he senses Harry exhausted, vulnerable, and sleeping, he begins to project the scenerio he wants Harry to believe. I don't think Voldemort preferred the event to occur at 5:00pm, but that's when he felt Harry's vulnerability, and so he seized the opportunity to exploit it. I'm sure by that time, he was growing very frustrated because he expected Harry to go after the Prophecy much sooner. Unfortunately, he made the mistake of assuming that Harry knew about the Prophecy, both what it concerned, and now with Voldemort's help, where it was. Again, I think Voldemort acted at that time simply because he felt the vulnerability and he exploited it while it was there. I'm sure he would have preferred for the opportunity to come in the middle of the night, but you take it where you get it. > Neri concludes: > > Even if Secret Agent Snape failed to see where some of these things > point to, elementary caution should have prompted him, at the very > least, to find out what Umbridge did with Harry, to update HQ about > the situation, and to ask them to check on the guard in the DoM. Not > doing any of these for several hours is, dare I say it, slightly > irresponsible. > > Neri bboyminn: Snape is limited in how and to what degree he can interfer with Umbridge's affairs. Also, by this time, I don't think there was a guard at the Dept of Mysteries from the Order. The only guard there would have been the Security Guard, and I can't imagine Snape /calling him up/ and asking if he's happened to see Harry Potter lurking about. It's a nice thought, but it lacks a certain degree of real-life practicality. You can say he should have called but exactly how was that cheery conversation suppose to go without raising a lot of suspicion? Even if Shacklebolt goes to check, what's he suppose to say? The Ministry is already extremely watchfull for any Ministry employees who might be up to no good. So, exactly how as Shacklebolt suppose to explain his activity? Conclusion: Harry is in the castle in the company of several people including a Ministry Official and the Headmistress. Sirius is safe and toasty warm at home with several of his friends and members of the Order. >From Snape's limited knowledge, what really is there to be worried about? That's my story and I'm sticking to it. Steve/bboyminn (was bboy_mn) From rarpsl at optonline.net Thu Nov 4 08:34:24 2004 From: rarpsl at optonline.net (Robert A. Rosenberg) Date: Thu, 4 Nov 2004 03:34:24 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: The only one he ever feared? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117199 At 02:02 +0000 on 11/03/2004, Steve wrote about [HPforGrownups] Re: The only one he ever feared?: >How many people here have pointed out what a hopeless villain >Voldemort is? How many of his wacky, ill-conceived, poorly formed, >poorly excecuted plans have we seen so far? I mean damn, hasn't this >quy ever read The Evil Overlord's Handbook? Available online at http://www.eviloverlord.com/. From rarpsl at optonline.net Thu Nov 4 08:05:41 2004 From: rarpsl at optonline.net (Robert A. Rosenberg) Date: Thu, 4 Nov 2004 03:05:41 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Was Harry designed as the Anti-LV weapon ? In-Reply-To: <20041104055733.29847.qmail@web53104.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20041104055733.29847.qmail@web53104.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117200 At 21:57 -0800 on 11/03/2004, Kelsey Dangelo wrote about [HPforGrownups] Re: Was Harry designed as the Anti-LV weapo: >Kelsey: >Here's one of my problems with the >prophesy-literary-function. Personally, I was >disappointed that the prophesy was the answer to the >BIG question "Why does Voldie want to kill Harry?" It >seemed to be a cop-out (but I don't have a problem >with it following literary tradition). > >Prophesies are tricky. People can't tell if the >prophesy is predicting the future or causing the >future. Would Harry defeat the Dark Lord if it hadn't >been for the prophesy? Would Oedipus killed his father >and married his mother if it hadn't been for the >prophesy? It's impossible to tell. The Fates may have >set it up, or they may just be just another word for >what was already determined by who Voldie and Harry >were. Free will or none, Parental planning or none, >Oracle or none, it seems like that's the way things >are. > >Basically, it turns into a mobieous strip of logic. I agree. I was once in a discussion triggered by a Web Site with ground rules for being an Evil Overlord (Basically a list of all the Dumb Mistakes the Villain does in stories phased in terms of "Do it This Way'). My comment was about the classic "Someone has been (or is soon going to be) born who will defeat you x years from now" type Prophesy (as in the HP vs. LV one). My tongue in check comment was NOT to go out and try to kill him now (and thus fail and give him a reason to come after you) but to either protect and guard him or just take a hands-off stance. This is because the Prophesy implies that you are going to still be around (and in power) in X years and by then you might want to retire and can cut a deal with him to do so (so long as you can show that you did not try to kill him soon after his birth when you had the chance/option). Also, he is your survival guarantee since so long as he is still alive, so are you (so you both can have that "Final Showdown"). I read a story once that had this twist ending. The so called Villain was just trying to keep civilization running until it was time for the Prophesy to occur and he could turn the job over to the person who was destined to "defeat" him. From nkafkafi at yahoo.com Thu Nov 4 08:58:37 2004 From: nkafkafi at yahoo.com (nkafkafi) Date: Thu, 04 Nov 2004 08:58:37 -0000 Subject: Good moral core (Re: Dirty Harry/Clean Harry) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117201 > Del replies : > But free will is limited by both nature and nurture. > > Mental and physical illnesses, for example, can severely restrict the > way someone uses their free will. In fact, they can restrict it so > much that sometimes this will isn't free anymore. Neri: Oh dear, I didn't mean to get into this philosophical and moral ground. Now lets see if I can talk my way out of it. Free will is not just a philosophical concept, it is a practical and legal one, and it is the basis of modern society. Suppose we were to put a 16 yrs old boy (Tom Riddle, for the purpose of the discussion) on trial for the murder of a girl (Myrtle). Would you acquit him because he never knew his parents, or because he claims he has a condition called sociopathy, or because he felt that only power is important to him, or because it was just the combination of nature and nurture that made him do it? I think not. You would say that, even at this young age, he is responsible for his own actions, and if he doesn't understand that murder is bad, at least he must be able to perceive that society does not allow murder. So unless you think that all criminals actually suffer from mental illness and should be hospitalized rather than jailed, you must allow that people are responsible for their actions. In other words, they have free will. Regarding Alla's question when does free will appear, I think that the law reasonably recognizes that this does not happen over night. It is a gradual process. Most of us won't hold a 3 yrs old responsible for his actions. We would hold a 11 yrs old somewhat responsible for some actions. I think most of us would agree that a 16 yrs old can stand trial for murder, but we would probably let him get away with a less severe sentence. So acquiring free will takes time. I think this is also some answer to Del saying that free will can be restricted by experience, conventions of culture and so on. When a person grows up, he/she has the option to ask questions, to learn more and transcend the conventions of his/her culture. Even if racism against muggleborns is common in Slytherin House, Tom Riddle still met muggleborns from other houses, and he had the opportunity to discover that they aren't worse or better than purebloods. But he apparently chose not to use this opportunity. Regarding mental illness, again I would go by the law here (not because I consider the law to be above everything, but simply because lawmakers and judges have a long practical experience of tackling these dilemmas, so it saves me the effort of going through all of them myself). There are indeed certain very severe mental conditions which legally make a person irresponsible for his actions, but to my knowledge "sociopathy" is not one of them. I don't consider physical illness as restricting free will. Or rather, the restriction is only technical. If Tom Riddle was completely paralyzed except for one finger, then technically he would have found it difficult to murder Myrtle. But if somebody put a gun in his hand so he could use his single functioning finger to pull the trigger and murder Myrtle, then he would have been fully responsible for this murder. Where does free will come from and how can it be reconciled with the mechanistic view of nature and nurture is certainly a very deep question in philosophy, science and theology, and I'm not sure I want to go there. But practically, most of us accept that free will exists despite nature and despite nurture. If you think that people are responsible for their own actions then you accept free will. So if someone suggests that Harry is "good" because he had loving parents during the first year of his life, and Tom was "evil" because he didn't have even that much, I ask myself if I would acquit Tom Riddle in a trial because he never knew his parents. And I answer myself that I wouldn't. I don't know if JKR would, but somehow I don't think so. If she would, it means that Riddle didn't have free will when he killed Myrtle, and was a mindless monster rather than a person. A monster cannot be held responsible for its actions, it just has to be exterminated, and no qualms about it. Actually, Tom did use a monster (the basilisk) to murder Myrtle, and it is obvious to all of us that it is Tom and not the basilisk who is responsible for the crime of murdering Myrtle. JKR had the option to make the dark side in her story represented by some kind of monster, but she chose to make him a person. Moreover, it is a person who is very similar to Harry, and JKR tells us through DD that the only difference between Tom and Harry is the different choices they made. This implies to me that she is tackling the question of free will. > Del wrote: > > As for Harry, he seems to repeatedly make instinctive decisions. > Because those choices have good consequences, we don't wonder too much > about them. But let's see things another way : what if Harry's > decision to go after the Philosopher's stone had resulted in > Hermione's or Ron's death ? What if Harry's decision to go after the > spiders in CoS had resulted in Ron's death ? What if Harry's decision > to enter the Chamber of Secrets had resulted in his own death, in > Ginny's death and in Diary!Tom's gaining a real body ? Neri: But this is exactly what happened in GoF with Cedric, and in OotP with Sirius. It actually started in PoA when Wormtail escaped to help Voldemort come back to power because of the moral decision of Harry to spare his life. I guess JKR thought that at age 12 Harry was not yet ready to understand that sometimes choices taken with good intensions might result in bad consequences, but now he is ready for that. So it is not canon that Harry has some "instinct" for doing the right thing. Harry is not a saint and he doesn't have any monopoly on goodness. But he does at least try to do the good thing most of the time, and I think this is where his power comes from. > Del: > But doesn't that go against his free will ? > Now that he knows about the Prophecy, this knowledge will interfere > with his decision-making. Because he knows he is The One, he might > decide to do things he might not have done otherwise, or the other way > around. Whether this means that he is more free or less free is not > the point : the point is that his free will is now conditioned by his > knowledge IMO. > > In other words : IMO, free will is not really free. It is only free > within the limits your nature and your nurture have put on you. Neri: I'm not sure I understand what you are asking. You could of course say that free will is affected by knowledge. It is technically true, but it demotes free will to the mechanistic level of cause and effect, and free will doesn't make much sense in this level. I would make more sense to say that when a person exerts his free will to make choices, he can use his knowledge in order to arrive at better decisions. When Harry didn't know about the prophecy, it seemed to him that he had a lot of freedom, but this freedom was an illusion, because the prophecy still existed even when Harry didn't know about it. It was this lack of knowledge that cost him Sirius' life. Now that he knows about the prophecy his options seem much more limited, but since he knows about them, he can make wiser decisions. Neri From nightmasque at yahoo.com Thu Nov 4 07:06:58 2004 From: nightmasque at yahoo.com (Feng Zengkun) Date: Wed, 3 Nov 2004 23:06:58 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: The only one he ever feared? In-Reply-To: <20041104042834.59641.qmail@web53102.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041104070658.82494.qmail@web52604.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 117202 > Juli wrote: > > What I'm thinking is WHY would a grown wizard fear > a one year old baby? prophecy or not, what could he do? > Harry didn't defeat or whatever LV the first time, it > was Lily, she's the one that left that ancient magic > that made the AK backfire. I thought Voldie's attack was a pre-emptive strike. He wasn't afraid of Harry as a one-year old baby, but what that baby could grow up to become i.e. the cause of his downfall. So attacking Harry while the latter is a baby makes perfect sense, since his nemesis would be at his most vulnerable then. "Feng Zengkun" From h.m.s at mweb.co.za Thu Nov 4 07:13:58 2004 From: h.m.s at mweb.co.za (H.M.S) Date: Thu, 4 Nov 2004 09:13:58 +0200 Subject: Re Harry's stay at the Durleys Message-ID: <004801c4c23e$34d34b40$3400a8c0@Sharon> No: HPFGUIDX 117203 JKR has said that Harry's stay at the Dursleys will be his shortest yet. I may have missed something (because I skim read my messages) but so far people seem to believe that he will be out of there before the end of chapter 1. However, I beleive the wording to be "Harry's stay" ie: he could be there for just 2 days (for example) but so much happens to him that JKR takes 6 chapters to write about it! Starting to get really desperate for the next book! Sharon [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From nightmasque at yahoo.com Thu Nov 4 07:16:53 2004 From: nightmasque at yahoo.com (Feng Zengkun) Date: Wed, 3 Nov 2004 23:16:53 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Dementors in Little Whinging In-Reply-To: <20041104040951.95344.qmail@web53108.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041104071653.66740.qmail@web52609.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 117204 --- Glavgirl wrote: > In OOTP we learned that Umbridge had ordered the > Dementors to Little Whinging. Since she was working > at the MoM at the time, would the ministry not have > a record of someone ordering them? No more mention > was made about it after Harry's hearing. Are we > going to find out in HBP that the Minister actually > finds out about Umbridge and the dementors? It almost > appears like she is one of Voldemort's Death Eaters > instead of a Ministry official. She got along well > with Draco and his cronies in Slytherin. Could > Umbridge be one of Voldemort's?? >Juli: I remember that during OoP when Sirius was >talking to the Trio in the chimney, Ron suggested she >could be a Death Eater, but he replied that just >because she's mean she's not necessarily a DE. I think it would weaken the series as a whole if Umbridge did turn out to be a DE. I think that one of JKR's points is that not all bad people are DEs, because even people working on the 'good' side (in their opinion) can sanction dubious actions that they believe is for the common good. Crouch, for instance, in the first VW, allowing Aurors to kill suspected DEs (there's a quote somewhere, I just can't remember it), and sending people to prison without trials. As for the ministry keeping records, I can totally see Fudge closing an eye to Umbridge's actions if/when he found out. "Feng Zengkun" From gbannister10 at aol.com Thu Nov 4 12:15:10 2004 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Thu, 04 Nov 2004 12:15:10 -0000 Subject: Good moral core (Re: Dirty Harry/Clean Harry) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117205 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "delwynmarch" wrote: Del: > Harry is not even in this situation : he *was* taught some principles > by the Dursleys, albeit bad ones. And yet as soon as he gets away from > the Dursleys, those principles are immediately replaced by good ones. > How come ? SSSusan: > " Don't some people just do good things because they've seen bad > things and don't want to repeat them?" Del: > Yes, but very often it implies a *conscious* decision. One first has > to realise what happened and why it happened, and then one has to > decide not to do it, or identify an opposite behaviour, and then one > has to catch oneself when doing it or when having an opportunity to do > otherwise. > > Harry just seems to jump from "I don't like that bad behaviour" to > "I'll do that opposite behaviour". Geoff: While Harry has been at the Dursleys, he has been miserably unhappy. He has been treated as a second-class citizen and if the Dursleys have noticed anything which seems to give him pleasure, they have tried to eliminate it or limit it. But I think we have already picked on an example of the motivation to go the other way and that is when he shares what he has bought on the train with Ron. '"Go on, have a pasty," said Harry who had never had anything to share before or, indeed, anyone to share it with. It was a nice feeling, sitting there with Ron, eating their way through all Harry's pasties and cakes" (PS "The Journey from Platform Nine and Three Quarters" p.76 UK edition) Harry finds at this point that sharing time, thoughts, experiences and material things produces a "feel-good factor". There are other places as the story progresses which reinforce this: becoming the Quidditch seeker comes to mind. He is quickly finding that being pleasant, doing good things and being with friends is more uplifting than sinking into despair or following the Riddle line and becoming a self-seeker. By doing this, Tom is denying himself the knowledge of real friendship. His only support comes from fear or sycophantic followers and so he effectively isolates himself from anything good or positive. Looking further at the suggestion that Harry is headstrong and rushes into situations, how often do we do something which, in hindsight, looks foolhardy or dangerous? Taking the Chamber of Secrets as an example, apart from going with Ron (and Lockhart), what alternatives were there? The message on the wall implies that Ginny was in mortal danger. So who does Harry approach? He could go to Dumbledore who might well place the tips of his fingers together while he cogitated for some long time; McGonagall would probably look severe and dither... If he then persuaded them to come, it would emerge that a Parseltongue speaker was needed to open the Chamber and can you imagine Dumbledore or McGonagall going down the slide? Meanwhile, Ginny is getting weaker, Tom Riddle is getting stronger and less fuzzy round the edges and trouble at t'mill is getting closer.... Geoff http://www.aspectsofexmoor.com From ladyramkin2000 at yahoo.co.uk Thu Nov 4 12:16:03 2004 From: ladyramkin2000 at yahoo.co.uk (ladyramkin2000) Date: Thu, 04 Nov 2004 12:16:03 -0000 Subject: An Awful Thought Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117206 I have just finished reading a brilliant book, "End Game", which summarizes all the various endings that people have written to "The Mystery of Edwin Drood". As most people know, Dickens died suddenly while less than half way through his last book, and it has been a happy hunting ground ever since for clues to how it was going to end. (Remind you of anything?) Now the awful thought that struck me was: If (God forbid) Jo was run over by a bus tomorrow, would we be in the same position as the Droodists, endlessly theorizing but never able to reach a satisfactory conclusion. I cant bear to think about it. Sylvia From finwitch at yahoo.com Thu Nov 4 12:20:42 2004 From: finwitch at yahoo.com (finwitch) Date: Thu, 04 Nov 2004 12:20:42 -0000 Subject: Re Harry's stay at the Durleys In-Reply-To: <004801c4c23e$34d34b40$3400a8c0@Sharon> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117207 Sharon wrote: > JKR has said that Harry's stay at the Dursleys will be his shortest yet. > I may have missed something (because I skim read my messages) but so far people seem to believe that he will be out of there before the end of chapter 1. However, I beleive the wording to be "Harry's stay" ie: he could be there for just 2 days (for example) but so much happens to him that JKR takes 6 chapters to write about it! > > Starting to get really desperate for the next book! > > Sharon Finwitch: Well, as I recall, she also said we SEE very little of them. What comes to several chapters for a few days, well - in CoS, it takes several chapters to describe ONE day. (And, he's already been at Dursleys for a month, the DAY being his birthday). Sure, JKR *could* write about Harry at 4 Privet Drive without saying a thing about Dursleys (say, Harry's recalling events that happened in WW, reading the Daily Prophet/the Quibbler, reading mail from Ron&Hermione&Remus&Moody - possibly OWL-results...) His "Shortest stay ever", however, means to me that this time we begin EARLY. That in turn means that Harry's to LEAVE early too - because I doubt that Harry goes into a new place and nothing's written about THAT. And um - JKR's website has given us the title for the *second chapter* behind that door. That title gives much root to speculations that Harry won't stay longer than one chapter as it can be found on a map as a street name, and grammar says it cannot really be much else. Finwitch From mpjdekker at hotmail.com Thu Nov 4 12:35:11 2004 From: mpjdekker at hotmail.com (mightymaus75) Date: Thu, 04 Nov 2004 12:35:11 -0000 Subject: Lupin's mind powers was Re: DD and the rat: Conspiracy theories compared [LONG] In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117208 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" wrote: > > Pippin: > > In chapter 10, Harry is unable to ask his question about why > > dementors affect him so strongly, but Lupin answers it, "as > > though he had read Harry's mind." > > > > In chapter 17, Lupin is shown "staring so intently at Black it > > seemed he was trying to read his mind." > > Carol: > Yes. We have similar statements regarding Snape, but no solid > evidence of Legilimency (beyond Snape's Legilimens spell) for > either of them. And of course, we also have the unreliable > narrator, who as usual is giving us Harry's perception rather than > fact. Note "as though" and "seemed" in the quotes. > There is also this instance in OotP where Lupin seemed to read Harry's mind: "'A surprising number of people volunteered to come and get you,' said Lupin, as though he had read Harry's mind; the corners of his mouth twitched slightly." - [OotP] Of course these instances can be seen as just a description of Harry's perception of the situation. You have to be very careful though when JKR starts using similes. While similes normally are used to better describe a scene or object by comparing it to something else, JKR has a habit of using them to literally describe what is going on. A few examples: "A rustling noise nearby made all three of them jump. Winky the house- elf was fighting her way out of a clump of bushes nearby. She was moving in a most peculiar fashion, apparently with great difficulty; it was as though someone invisible were trying to hold her back." ? [GoF] "'Now stay still, everyone, while I give us a bit of light in here,' Moody whispered. The others' hushed voices were giving Harry an odd feeling of foreboding; it was as though they had just entered the house of a dying person." ? [OotP] "When the last person ? Zacharias ? had signed, Hermione took the parchment back and slipped it carefully into her bag. There was an odd feeling in the group now. It was as though they had just signed some kind of contract." ? [OotP] Winky was of course being held back by an invisible someone, Harry did enter the house of a dying person, and Hermione had made them sign a kind of contract. I'm willing to bet good money that Lupin is in fact a Legilimens. -Maus From finwitch at yahoo.com Thu Nov 4 12:35:49 2004 From: finwitch at yahoo.com (finwitch) Date: Thu, 04 Nov 2004 12:35:49 -0000 Subject: Totally Obssessed - Found It! - Spinners End - Near BRISTOL! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117209 > Geoff: > I travelled into Bristol quite frequently until a couple of years ago > living only an hour and a half's drive away. > > Bristol is a fairly compact city, spreading out more to the north. > Setting out from Weston-super-Mare which, for non-UK folk, is a well- > known seaside town south of the city on the Bristol Channel, he would > be more likely to find himself flying over Bath. > > However, I still think the whole matter is pure speculation and the > link between Godric's Hollow and Spinners End is very tenuous. > > Geoff Finwitch: South? more to west in the map I looked, although Bristol is a BIT more north from that spot in Weston-super-Mare. However, Bristol is directly to West from Surrey near London. I see how Hagrid could have flown over Bristol and directly to East afterwards for Surrey in order to avoid getting lost. And while you have been there while I haven't - well, a flyer doesn't need to use a road (M5 going south)... What would Hagrid have been doing at Spinners End, though? Visiting Aberforth Dumbledore, perhaps, because he WAS lost? Finwitch From willsonkmom at msn.com Thu Nov 4 12:53:34 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Thu, 04 Nov 2004 12:53:34 -0000 Subject: Hogwarts Uniform with Link - OT In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117210 Alex wrote: > To drag this message back on topic > Isn't it funny that we never see Harry or the other muggleborn boys > complaining about wearing what is, essentially, a shapeless black > dress? You'd think some of them would initially be reluctant. > Potioncat: Good point. The only boy who has rebelled was Ron, who grew up in a household where robes are always worn (at least by the adults) Even he thought his dress robes looked like a dress. For that matter, has anyone ever tried to write with a quill? It's very difficult. I think the Muggle-born would be making a real mess of things, having to suddenly use them. (No wonder the Patil twins sneak in pencils.) From foxmoth at qnet.com Thu Nov 4 13:27:49 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Thu, 04 Nov 2004 13:27:49 -0000 Subject: Unreliable narrator - The Snape Timeline In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117211 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "nkafkafi" wrote: Wouldn't these suspicions merit, just to be on the safe side, finding out where is Harry, alerting HQ to the developing situation, and increasing the alertness of the guard in the DoM? We are talking about a war, after all, There have been several attacks already, and secret agents are paid to be distrustful and guarded, even slightly paranoid.< > > > Steve : > > So what does Snape do? He goes to his office, makes a nice cup of tea, and sits back sipping it, savoring all the deliciously nasty things Umbridge is likely to do to Harry and friends, all the while thinking that the little brat deserves it for all the rules he breaks. Abouttime some one took him to task for this. > > > > Neri: > Where I served, an officer acting like this in such a situation would have been demoted to privet on the spot. < Pippin: I apologize for calling attention to a typo, and wish I could resist the image of ErringSoldier!Neri transfigured into a shrub But this points up a relevant fact--nobody in the Order can be demoted to private, because AFAWK the Order has no ranks. It's not an army, not even an army of spies. It's a band of irregulars. Its members owe allegiance to Dumbledore personally, not to a set of initials or a slot on a chart. The Order members are under no obligation to trust or obey Snape, and vice versa. Of the five people at HQ that night, at least Moody and Sirius doubt Snape. Unless things have changed drastically since PoA, Snape deeply distrusts Lupin. Tonks and Shacklebolt are unknowns, but as you say, spies are slightly paranoid. Snape has heard from Umbridge that she caught Harry using her fire to communicate with someone, probably Grimmauld Place since Harry wouldn't know of another fire that would be secure on the other end. Having done this, Harry believes Sirius is being held. But when Snape himself contacts the Order he is told that Sirius is alive and well. Is this not ample reason for paranoid!Snape to believe something has gone wrong at HQ? Snape must then communicate this to Dumbledore as secretly as possible, which may not be as instantly as possible. I have theorized that Snape normally communicates with Dumbledore by using the pensieve as a letter drop. His backup means of communication would logically be Dumbledore's deputy McGonagall, but she has taken an unexpected turn for the worse and been transferred suddenly (and suspiciously?) to St Mungo's. Snape has no reason to think Harry can get to the Ministry or GP before Dumbledore returns to HQ. As far as we know there's no way to get from the forest to Hogsmeade without going back past the castle or crossing the lake, so Snape would expect Harry to come back to the castle to use a fire, or to try to persuade Snape that he needs to find out about Sirius. Snape was no doubt happily anticipating making Harry sweat a bit before telling him Sirius was okay -- but then Harry didn't come back and Snape grew worried -- but not at once. Snape knows that under normal circumstances there is nothing in the forest that would hurt a man armed with a crossbow, much less a fully qualified wizard who's defeated Voldemort four times running. It's not full moon so there are no dangerous werewolves. The acromantula colony and Grawp are unknown to Snape. The centaurs are attacking any adults they find roaming the forest and would certainly not countenance the presence of Death Eaters (including Snape), while they themselves have a policy of not attacking "foals." No doubt Snape wanted to wait for Dumbledore to return to HQ so that he could report directly, but when Harry still didn't return, concern that Harry might conceivably be on his way to the MoM outgrew his other reservations and he decided to risk contacting the Order, knowing that Dumbledore would soon be there. He specifically asked Sirius to personally inform Dumbledore about what had happened while he went to search the Forest. Why would Snape have done that if he had a secure means of contacting Dumbledore himself? Pippin From finwitch at yahoo.com Thu Nov 4 13:48:31 2004 From: finwitch at yahoo.com (finwitch) Date: Thu, 04 Nov 2004 13:48:31 -0000 Subject: Why were Harry's parents so rich? In-Reply-To: <15d.42e85583.2ebae0ab@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117212 > Steve wrote: > Rowling said in an interview that James > inherited his fortune, > actually. There are some who like to imagine that since James' > family came from Godric's Hollow, and that since Bowman Wright, the > inventor of the Golden Snitch, was also from Godric's Hollow, that > James is the heir to the Golden Snitch fortune. > *************************************************** > > Chancie > When you said this, that reminded me of when Harry is in Snape's > pensive, and James is said to be playing with a snitch. Does anyone > else think its odd that since James was a chaser, he had a snitch on > hand??? Hmmmm..... Finwitch: We *might* learn this, if Harry gets his hands on Potter-family-tree. (He's seen Sirius', but who's to say he won't see his own in HBP?) The family-tree (or it's copy) could be in Potter-vault for example? Or Harry's getting royalties from Quidditch-shops and investigates due to a bank-raport, possibly urged by Hermione? But as things are, I'm nots sure if we ever find out... Only two books to go, and Harry has other things to occupy himself with. Then again, learning the full extent of Potter family would be stuff for 7th book as Harry comes of age, but oh well... BTW, if they were *rich*, did they have any house-elves? And if they did have, where are they now? Finwitch From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Thu Nov 4 14:06:15 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Thu, 04 Nov 2004 14:06:15 -0000 Subject: Good moral core (Re: Dirty Harry/Clean Harry) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117213 Neri wrote : "Oh dear, I didn't mean to get into this philosophical and moral ground. Now lets see if I can talk my way out of it. " Del replies : I didn't mean to either, and I don't like it because I think I'm reading way too much into a simple hero vs. villain story. Neri wrote : "Free will is not just a philosophical concept, it is a practical and legal one, and it is the basis of modern society. Suppose we were to put a 16 yrs old boy (Tom Riddle, for the purpose of the discussion) on trial for the murder of a girl (Myrtle). Would you acquit him because he never knew his parents, or because he claims he has a condition called sociopathy, or because he felt that only power is important to him, or because it was just the combination of nature and nurture that made him do it? I think not. You would say that, even at this young age, he is responsible for his own actions, and if he doesn't understand that murder is bad, at least he must be able to perceive that society does not allow murder." Del replies : Agreed. I would hold Tom *legally* responsible because he obviously knew that society disapproves of murder, and that it will enforce consequences on you if you do it. However, if it became apparent that Tom doesn't have a moral understanding of what's wrong with murdering people, I probably wouldn't hold him morally responsible. I guess I would then throw him in prison and at the same time I would put him in therapy (if there's a therapy for such cases). And as long as he doesn't grasp our morality, I'm afraid society would have to keep him in a position where he can't hurt people. I would *not* expect him to reform on his own, since any reformation not based on morality would only be a *surface* reformation, a lie. Neri wrote : " So acquiring free will takes time. I think this is also some answer to Del saying that free will can be restricted by experience, conventions of culture and so on. When a person grows up, he/she has the option to ask questions, to learn more and transcend the conventions of his/her culture. Even if racism against muggleborns is common in Slytherin House, Tom Riddle still met muggleborns from other houses, and he had the opportunity to discover that they aren't worse or better than purebloods. But he apparently chose not to use this opportunity." Del replies : Two things. 1. He didn't use that opportunity to modify his morality to make it more conform to ours, granted. But one question is : why would he ? He had his own belief system that satisfied him, so why would he change it ? People usually don't change their morality unless something in that morality makes them uneasy. Tom hated Muggles and Muggleborns because he believed his Muggle father had abandoned his witch mother because she was a witch. This was a pretty compelling reason, even if it was a completely selfish one. Then he goes to school, and discovers that many Muggleborns are just as fine as wizard borns. So what ? He still hates his father and he still has this unreasonable desire for vengeance. Muggleborns will suffer in the process, but so what ? Tom has no empathy for them, he doesn't care for their hurt and death, he cares only about himself. 2. You say : "Tom Riddle still met muggleborns from other houses, and he had the opportunity to discover that they aren't worse or better than purebloods." But this again implies a scale. What scale are we talking about ? Muggleborns are no better or worse than wizard-borns *according to what* ? In Tom Riddle's mind, Muggleborns *are* worse on the "purity of blood" scale, which is the one that matters to him. This scale might make no sense to us, but it apparently did to him. Neri wrote : " Where does free will come from and how can it be reconciled with the mechanistic view of nature and nurture is certainly a very deep question in philosophy, science and theology, and I'm not sure I want to go there. But practically, most of us accept that free will exists despite nature and despite nurture. If you think that people are responsible for their own actions then you accept free will." Del replies : I didn't mean to get that deep either. But when it comes to free will, I must admit I have different views for different situations. I believe there are different levels of free will, and even different types of free will. Tom had a legal free will, of course, but what I'm wondering is if he had a moral one. Harry always has a practical free will, but the way he doesn't seem to hesitate to take crazy decisions makes me wonder how much of a psychological free will he's got. It's like he's wired to systematically make the heroic decision, without ever considering any other possible option. As he himself explains, he doesn't *want* to be the hero, he doesn't *choose* it, that's the way he *is*. He can choose whether or not to act on his heroic compulsions, but those compulsions don't let him free to consider other alternatives than just "do it or not do it". I guess that would help to explain why he got so mad at Hermione in OoP when she suggested something different than going to the DoM. His compulsion was telling him "go and save Sirius, or don't go and let him die", so what Hermione was telling him wasn't making any sense. This is quite scary to me, because it shows that he's almost prisoner of this compulsion. But Sirius died because of it : that's bound to change something. Neri wrote : " JKR had the option to make the dark side in her story represented by some kind of monster, but she chose to make him a person. Moreover, it is a person who is very similar to Harry, and JKR tells us through DD that the only difference between Tom and Harry is the different choices they made. This implies to me that she is tackling the question of free will." Del replies : You're putting the finger on something that's always bothered me : the fact that LV is such a cartoonish, 2D villain. He might have a human shape, but technically, he IS a monster. He displays only the faults of humanity, never any good side. He never has qualms about what he does. We never see him being influenced in the slightest by anything good, even at the age of 16. He never had any noble or altruistic intention. He doesn't have *any* good side, and he never did so far as we can see ! JKR even said that he never loved and she implied that if he had he could not have become LV. There's *none* of the good side of humanity in him, and it seems like there never was. I do call that a monster. An emotional monster. Definitely not a real person. (Hey, Samurai Jack is on TV, and I'm suddenly struck by how similar Aku and LV are. But Aku is not and never was human : he was born the embodiment of evil. In fact, Harry's and Jack's stories are eerily similar. Humph.) Ok, Neri, or anyone else, tell me I've gone overboard and I'm loosing my mind, because I don't like where those reasonings are taking me. Del From gbannister10 at aol.com Thu Nov 4 14:07:48 2004 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Thu, 04 Nov 2004 14:07:48 -0000 Subject: An Awful Thought In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117214 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "ladyramkin2000" wrote: Sylvia: > I have just finished reading a brilliant book, "End Game", which > summarizes all the various endings that people have written to "The > Mystery of Edwin Drood". As most people know, Dickens died suddenly > while less than half way through his last book, and it has been a > happy hunting ground ever since for clues to how it was going to end. > (Remind you of anything?) > Now the awful thought that struck me was: If (God forbid) Jo was run > over by a bus tomorrow, would we be in the same position as the > Droodists, endlessly theorizing but never able to reach a > satisfactory conclusion. I cant bear to think about it. Geoff: If it happened tomorrow, we would have a large 1000 page book in a few months: Book Five and a Half: "Harry Potter and the Parallel Universes: the top 10 endings to the series" compiled by..... supply your favourite ten posters. :-) Geoff http://www.aspectsofexmoor.com From naama_gat at hotmail.com Thu Nov 4 14:11:02 2004 From: naama_gat at hotmail.com (naamagatus) Date: Thu, 04 Nov 2004 14:11:02 -0000 Subject: Good moral core (Re: Dirty Harry/Clean Harry) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117215 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "delwynmarch" wrote: > Del replies : > I agree that once he'd done it, he liked the feelings it created in him. > > But why did he tell Ron to go and have a pasty to start with ? > > As the narrator reminds us, Harry never had an opportunity to share > before, so he doesn't know that sharing creates good feelings. > Moreover, the Dursleys taught him by example that it is better *not* > to share, that the ideal way is to have as much for yourself as possible. > > So *why* did he invite Ron to his feast ? What prompted him to share ? > How about Kant's moral imperative? (Quoted from http://www.faithnet.org.uk/A2% 20Subjects/Ethics/catergoricalimperative.htm) "... 'Act as if the maxim of your action was to become through your will a universal law of nature.' In Christianity this could be expressed as 'Treat others as you want them to treat you.' (Matthew 7:12))" I also makes sense from a purely psychologcial point of view (not Kantian) - Harry shared his sweets because, if the situation was reversed, he would have liked Ron to share with him. All resting on our universal ability to empathise - put ourselsves in the other person's shoes. This means that having been treated like garbage by the Dursleys, makes Harry *less* likely to treat others like that - because he knows how painful that is. (I think also according to research, most abused children do not become abusive parents themselves.) Naama From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Thu Nov 4 14:19:02 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Thu, 04 Nov 2004 14:19:02 -0000 Subject: Good moral core (Re: Dirty Harry/Clean Harry) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117216 Geoff wrote : " Harry finds at this point that sharing time, thoughts, experiences and material things produces a "feel-good factor". There are other places as the story progresses which reinforce this: becoming the Quidditch seeker comes to mind. He is quickly finding that being pleasant, doing good things and being with friends is more uplifting than sinking into despair or following the Riddle line and becoming a self-seeker. By doing this, Tom is denying himself the knowledge of real friendship. His only support comes from fear or sycophantic followers and so he effectively isolates himself from anything good or positive." Del replies : Agreed, this worked for Harry. But : 1. Harry first had to do those things *for no reason* before he discovered they produced good feelings in him. He had *no reason* to share his pasties with Ron when he did it. 2. Because it worked on Harry and it would work on most people doesn't mean it worked/would have worked on Tom. *If* Tom really didn't receive any love in his infancy, then he was *way more* damaged emotionally than Harry ever was. If he never bonded as an infant, then he would have had immense problems bonding later on. Harry was unconsciously eagerly *waiting* for an opportunity to bond. If Tom had never bonded before, then he would not have been open to bonding later. That's why I have a problem with the way JKR's writing LV : she makes him out to be a human monster, not a real person. Geoff wrote : "Looking further at the suggestion that Harry is headstrong and rushes into situations, how often do we do something which, in hindsight, looks foolhardy or dangerous? Taking the Chamber of Secrets as an example, apart from going with Ron (and Lockhart), what alternatives were there? The message on the wall implies that Ginny was in mortal danger. So who does Harry approach? He could go to Dumbledore who might well place the tips of his fingers together while he cogitated for some long time; McGonagall would probably look severe and dither... If he then persuaded them to come, it would emerge that a Parseltongue speaker was needed to open the Chamber and can you imagine Dumbledore or McGonagall going down the slide?" Del replies : I personally have no problem imagining DD or McGonagall going down the slide. Maybe those two would not have listened if Harry had just told them he knew where the opening of the Chamber of Secrets was (though DD is a Legilimens, so he would have known Harry was telling the truth). But once Harry did open the slide, I have no doubt that all the teachers would have followed him if only he had gone to fetch them. Del From gbannister10 at aol.com Thu Nov 4 14:20:18 2004 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Thu, 04 Nov 2004 14:20:18 -0000 Subject: Totally Obssessed - Found It! - Spinners End - Near BRISTOL! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117217 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "finwitch" wrote: Finwitch: > South? more to west in the map I looked, although Bristol is a BIT > more north from that spot in Weston-super-Mare. However, Bristol is > directly to West from Surrey near London. > > I see how Hagrid could have flown over Bristol and directly to East > afterwards for Surrey in order to avoid getting lost. > > And while you have been there while I haven't - well, a flyer doesn't > need to use a road (M5 going south)... Geoff: Well, yes, south-west perhaps. Actually, it's perception. I tend to overlook that, to go home from Bristol, I drive out west to join the motorway but I'm actually heading south on the M5 when I pass the W-s-M interchange a few miles along the way. However, I stick with my assertion that if you run a ruler from the north side of W-s-M to Staines, which is almost the most northerly bit of Surrey-that-was-Middlesex, your line takes you over Bath. Flying due east from Bristol will land you in the edge of Berkshire, just a few miles too far north. Crikey, chaps and chapesses, this thread is getting worse than Vauxhall Road..... :-) Geoff http://www.aspectsofexmoor.com From gbannister10 at aol.com Thu Nov 4 14:33:08 2004 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Thu, 04 Nov 2004 14:33:08 -0000 Subject: Good moral core (Re: Dirty Harry/Clean Harry) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117218 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "delwynmarch" wrote: Del: > I personally have no problem imagining DD or McGonagall going down the > slide. > > Maybe those two would not have listened if Harry had just told them he > knew where the opening of the Chamber of Secrets was (though DD is a > Legilimens, so he would have known Harry was telling the truth). But > once Harry did open the slide, I have no doubt that all the teachers > would have followed him if only he had gone to fetch them. Geoff: Yes, but there is very much a time imperative here, possibly another example of Harry's "hero-luck". When Harry gets to the Chamber and meets Tom Riddle, note one of the first things Riddle says: '"She's still alive," said Riddle. "But only just."' (COS "The Heir of Slytherin" p.227 UK edition) and again: '"..But there isn't much life left in her: she put too much into the diary, into me. Enough to let me leave its pages at last..."' (ibid. p.231) So, if Harry had opened the Chamber and then gone off to find Dumbledore at al. they might have arrived in the Chamber to find Ginny dead and Voldemort Mk.II waiting for them..... Geoff http://www.aspectsofexmoor.com From saraandra at saraandra.plus.com Thu Nov 4 14:43:09 2004 From: saraandra at saraandra.plus.com (amanitamuscaria1) Date: Thu, 04 Nov 2004 14:43:09 -0000 Subject: Detour (Was Re: Draco chapter) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117219 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "ms_luna_knows" wrote: snipsnipsnip > > Karen here, > Has anyone considered a theory that Draco's detour is more of a > personal detour- more of > crisis of self? Considering that Lucius is now a Known DE, not an > assumed one, LM will > surely lose a great deal of his perceived power within the WW and so > will Draco at > Hogwarts. Think about what Draco bases who he is on; being from a > pure blood, very > wealthly, powerful family. Lucius will/should lose the powerful part > for sure, at least in > the MoM, Can't see the new MoM letting in ANY Known DE. AmanitaMuscaria here - I'm not sure that is so. There's a question of survival - whether one buys in to the DE/Voldything analysis of pureblood/mudblood, there is still a decrease in numbers of wizards. This may be due to the first VoldyWar, it may not. The fact that there are empty classrooms (Firenze), Ron's saying they would have died out if wizards and muggles hadn't intermarried, and the question around numbers of children attending the school seem to indicate that there used to be more wizards and witches than there are now. So although the WW may not accept the pureblood thesis, there seems to me to be an acceptance and ambivalence towards dark wizards and witches in the general WW as well as the Ministry. I can see the new MoM letting the DEs go with a slap on the wrist if they haven't been directly accused of murdering a witch or wizard with pull. I can see Harry being almightily cheesed off by it all. With that cheerful thought, I think Draco will concentrate on maybe learning some real nastiness, and the 'detour' may involve a little visit to Moldyvort... > Therefore Draco will lose > "bragging rights"...I don't know if we'll hear too much more about > what is father will do, or > who his father will report to at the MoM...But then Draco may figure > out that his father has > more "power" because of his association with LV. At least people > will fear LM and that gives > him a certain type of power.. Draco will come to bask in that. > I think Draco will have > a "detour" because of his crisis, but will make his way back to be > the same obnoxious git > we have grown to loath. AmanitaMuscaria again - as above, Draco might become much more than the obnoxious git; he might even acquire some real venom and become a bit more believable. I can only hope! Cheers. AM From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Thu Nov 4 14:46:05 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Thu, 04 Nov 2004 14:46:05 -0000 Subject: Good moral core (Re: Dirty Harry/Clean Harry) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117220 Naama wrote : " How about Kant's moral imperative? (Quoted from http://www.faithnet.org.uk/A2%20Subjects/Ethics/catergoricalimperative.htm) "... 'Act as if the maxim of your action was to become through your will a universal law of nature.' In Christianity this could be expressed as 'Treat others as you want them to treat you.' (Matthew 7:12))"" Del replies : As a Christian, I've found that kids very often need to be taught that principle over and over again before they start understanding it. I see many truly Christian teenagers (and adults...) around me who are still unable to put it into practice. They need to be put through the whole process of "think about what it would do to you" before they start understanding what they are doing wrong. Naama wrote : "I also makes sense from a purely psychologcial point of view (not Kantian) - Harry shared his sweets because, if the situation was reversed, he would have liked Ron to share with him. All resting on our universal ability to empathise - put ourselsves in the other person's shoes. " Del replies : I have found this ability to be anything but universal. I have way too often found myself explaining to person A what's going on with person B and why person B has hard feelings for person A. Things that seem obvious to me just aren't to others. Inversely I also often found myself in the position of person A being told what's going on with person B, even though I had been actively trying to understand person B ! I was trying to put myself into person B's shoes, but I was getting it all wrong, because I didn't understand something about how person B works or, more disturbingly, about how *I* work. Naama wrote : "This means that having been treated like garbage by the Dursleys, makes Harry *less* likely to treat others like that - because he knows how painful that is. (I think also according to research, most abused children do not become abusive parents themselves.)" Del replies : Two instincts often conflict in abused people : the will not to make other people suffer as they did, and the human tendency to repeat learned behaviours. Abused kids won't become abusive parents if they learn another way to behave. They can choose to learn another way, they can be unconsciously taught another way, or their nature can simply be too much at odds with that original behaviour, but whatever the reason, they have to learn another way. If they don't, then the probability is quite high that they will repeat the abusive behaviour if they find themselves in the same circumstances. Applied to Harry, this means that Harry would naturally not want to treat others badly, but that he would still have to learn how to do so. Which is why it is so surprising that he doesn't seem to have to learn any new behaviour : it seems to come naturally to him. He never had a friend, and yet he instantly becomes the perfect friend. He never had anything, and yet he instantly shares. It seems like he's not a natural just at Quidditch, but at *happiness* too. And this is quite a rare gift. Del From foxmoth at qnet.com Thu Nov 4 14:48:02 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Thu, 04 Nov 2004 14:48:02 -0000 Subject: Unreliable narrator - The Snape Timeline In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117221 > > Neri: > > > > Snape also knows that: > > > > 1. Harry was under a mind attack by Voldemort during daytime (not during his dreams). > > > > BBoyminn: > No Harry's not, or at least Snape has no way of knowing that. All Snape has is a vague message from Harry that /he's got Padfoot that the place where it's hidden/; no more, no less. Well, that and the fact that Umbridge caught Harry breaking into her office. > Dumbledore says that Snape "realized" Harry had had a vision of Sirius being held. But we don't know whether the realization came immediately, by means of Harry's attempt to communicate mentally, or by deduction sometime later, after he'd learned that Harry had collapsed during testing that afternoon, and then rushed to the hospital wing demanding to speak to McGonagall. Pippin From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Thu Nov 4 14:57:04 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Thu, 04 Nov 2004 14:57:04 -0000 Subject: Good moral core (Re: Dirty Harry/Clean Harry) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117222 Geoff wrote : "So, if Harry had opened the Chamber and then gone off to find Dumbledore at al. they might have arrived in the Chamber to find Ginny dead and Voldemort Mk.II waiting for them....." Del replies : I don't think so. First because Harry himself took quite some time on the way to the Chamber (the Lockhart incident slowed him down quite a bit), and also because Ginny lasted long enough for Harry and Tom to have their lengthy show-down. I don't think it would have taken that long to go and get DD and the teachers, who would then have rushed to the Chamber. DD would have instantly recognised Tom, and he might have been able to dispose of him right away. Not as fun, granted, but completely possible in my opinion. Morever, this point isn't even valid as far as *Harry's decision* is concerned, since Harry didn't even know if Ginny was still alive anyway, and he for sure had no way of knowing about her life being transferred into Tom. Harry was only *hoping* that Ginny hadn't been killed yet, and since she'd been there for a while already, he had no reasonable reason not to go and get DD and the others. Getting himself and Ron killed (which was the most likely outcome) would not help Ginny. And expecting anything good from Lockhart was, well, a bit naive. If Lockhart had to be forcefully sent down the slide, how could Harry expect him to fight ? Especially considering the high level of incompetence he'd shown all year long. Del From foxmoth at qnet.com Thu Nov 4 15:40:30 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Thu, 04 Nov 2004 15:40:30 -0000 Subject: Good moral core (Re: Dirty Harry/Clean Harry) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117223 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "delwynmarch" wrote: > > Geoff wrote : > "So, if Harry had opened the Chamber and then gone off to find Dumbledore at al. they might have arrived in the Chamber to find > Ginny dead and Voldemort Mk.II waiting for them....." > > Del replies : > I don't think so. First because Harry himself took quite some time on the way to the Chamber (the Lockhart incident slowed him down quite a bit), and also because Ginny lasted long enough for Harry and Tom to have their lengthy show-down. > > I don't think it would have taken that long to go and get DD and theteachers, who would then have rushed to the Chamber. DD would have instantly recognised Tom, and he might have been able to dispose of him right away. > Pippin: Um, Dumbledore wasn't even at Hogwarts when Harry and Ron went to the chamber. As for the rest of the teachers, Harry and Ron thought that they had cravenly sent Lockhart to go confront the monster alone: "We'll make sure everyone's out of your way. You'll be able to tackle the monster all by yourself. A free rein at last." It sounded to them as if McGonagall "that's got *him* out from under our feet" would have been perfectly happy to see Lockhart devoured. Pippin From garybec101 at comcast.net Thu Nov 4 15:43:47 2004 From: garybec101 at comcast.net (garybec) Date: Thu, 04 Nov 2004 15:43:47 -0000 Subject: The only one he ever feared? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117224 Chancie wrote: A thought came to me as I was reading some other posts, and at the risk of sounding very stupid I figured I'd go ahead and throw this on out there. Why is DD the only wizard Voldemort feared? Becki: At least in America, not so much now, but years ago, people used the phrase, "God-fearing", when referring to being a "good-Christian". The term, really does not mean being afraid of God, but the "fear" portion means more like , respect, honor, reverence. Perhaps the term *feared* may be applied here. Not that Voldy is afraid of DD, in the scaredy-cat sense, but in a twisted way, has the respect, honor, reverence for him, at least for his abilities. The supreme nemesis. Becki (who bets a bundle that there was a prophecy about Voldys upcoming birth). From McGregorMax at ec.rr.com Thu Nov 4 15:53:37 2004 From: McGregorMax at ec.rr.com (mcmaxslb) Date: Thu, 04 Nov 2004 15:53:37 -0000 Subject: Chapter 29, Career Advice - Broken Potion In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117225 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "potioncat" wrote: > So,erm, you don't like Snape? I despise him. Snape has been a complete s#!+ to Harry from the first moment that they met and he has though his treatment of Harry created such animosity between them that Snivellus has hurt, indeed almost lost, the cause that he is supposed to be fighting for and it is 100% Snape's fault. He didn't try to teach Harry Occlumency. He just used the opportunity to torture him! If Snivellus had done the job properly then Voldemort wouldn't have been able to lure Harry to the MoM in the first place. Now some of the blame is Dumbledore's. He should've know that Snape wouldn't do the job right. I hope that in HBP that there is a scene in which Dumbledore takes Snively to task and tells him to grow up. From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com Thu Nov 4 15:50:52 2004 From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (Barry Arrowsmith) Date: Thu, 4 Nov 2004 15:50:52 +0000 Subject: Family ties. Message-ID: <4E29CD2D-2E79-11D9-8C41-000A9577CB94@btconnect.com> No: HPFGUIDX 117226 Useful bit of kit, that Tapestry. Gives us some of the familial background links between characters - the ones that JKR wants us to be aware of, anyway. The more interesting ones don't get mentioned of course - much to the frustration of those with a theory or two that might place even more of them firmly within boodlines that could give them interesting ties and/or a social context. So now we know about the Black tribe, their connections to the Lestranges, Malfoys, Weasleys and Tonks'. All well and good, but since the pureblood faction of the WW is so small, with everybody more or less distantly connected to everyone else, I'd love a closer look at it. Since so far as Harry could tell it stretched back to the Middle Ages (usually accepted as being between 500 - 800 years ago) it would have been more fun, and maybe more informative, if our noses hadn't been firmly pressed against a limited part of the whole. Where, for example, do you think the Potter family fit in the genealogy of the WW? Or DD, Snape or Tom Riddle? The Potters are a bit iffy; we've no confirmation as to whether or no they come from a pureblood line - just that they are an "old" wizarding family. (Just the sort - rich and old - to have a House Elf. Hello Dobby. So that's why you're so interested in Harry.) It's the name that bothers me - so unwizardly, so neutral, giving no clue (unlike so many others) as to the character of the family (Malfoy, Black, Bode, Fudge, Croaker etc.), nor yet is it one of the fanciful variety (Dumbledore, Diggle, Shunpike). Taken at face value it would indicate inter-marriage with Muggles at some time in the past - unless, and this is something I've wondered about before, it's not the 'true' family name but a nom de guerre, taken to provide a measure of protection for others that were perhaps more vulnerable. If so it probably didn't work; James's parents seem to have dropped off the twig with indecent haste. Just like Lily's - something that was speculated about in a thread a few weeks back. Another speculation of mine is a link between the Potters and the Longbottoms. No evidence, but Jo seems interested in bloodlines and the possibility of the two putative saviours of the WW coming from the same line is quite possible and viewed in retrospect would be unsurprising, almost traditional. Anyone think that DD, the acceptable face of wizardry, is not pureblood? Again, there's no evidence - not unless you're an unreconstructable theorist like me, in which case there's a pointer in his dress. I posit that all adult purebloods, unless otherwise forced by circumstances, always wear robes. (Madam Malkin, robes for all occasions. It throws a nice insight into the attitudes of Dear Dolly, her and her fluffy cardigan.) Most readers suspect DD of being a direct descendant of GG - that's unless he's an actual re-incarnation. It'd be neat, I'll admit, fitting nicely into the "Gryffindor good, Slytherin bad" ethical divide. Though if you pay close attention to canon, apart from an old-fashioned and to modern eyes reprehensible attachment to elitism, we've no evidence that old Sally actually did anything bad. He built the Chamber, true - and also left the Basilisk behind, though when he left it'd be no more than a tiddler. A fascination with highly dangerous monsters does not predicate an evil nature (see Hagrid) and he can hardly be responsible for what later generations get up to can he? Unless, that is, you subscribe to my 'Possession' ideas which suggest that Sally (or an important part of him) never left the Chamber and invaded or joined with Tom to form "Voldy!, the New! Improved! Mudblood and Muggle removal product!" Tom of course is the last remaining descendant (corrected from ancestor) of Sally. Though strictly speaking you could argue about that. Voldy (at least part Tom and therefore some minute fraction of the original Sally, diluted over many generations) placed some of himself (not just his powers - see CoS, chap. 18) in Harry. So Harry contains at least a fraction of a fraction - not quite zero - and according to DD in the same passage this transplant accounts for Harry's "Parseltongue....resourcefulness...determination....a certain disregard for the rules,..." Think how boring Harry would be if he wasn't part Voldy. He could be another Neville. But as it is he's been adopted - sort of. I also wonder about Voldy reconstructing himself from"..bone of my father..." Seems a bit strange. Why use the Muggle side of the family to re-create a wizard body? Unless Tom's lying to us again.... Riddle would be an apt wizarding name.... maybe that side is descended from Squibs. Hmm. It seems unlikely that in the hundreds of years covered by the Tapestry there wasn't some connection tying the Blacks to the descendants of Slytherin. "Toujours Pur" would be a sentiment Sally would whole-heartedly subscribe to, but nothing is shown. Nor are links evident to everyone's favourite Potions Prof. As a Slytherin it's probable he's a pureblood, but I don't know; I have a sneaking suspicion that his background is more complicated than that. I wouldn't be surprised if there wasn't an unexpected family connection or two buried in his background. Though it'd suit some if he were descended from Herpo the Foul. It's a bit much to expect, but it'd be fun if JKR published a full genealogy - maybe a supplement, like QTTA or FBaWTFT. You might even find your own family in there somewhere; or that funny old woman, the one that lives down the road, the one with all the cats. Kneasy From carolynwhite2 at aol.com Thu Nov 4 15:55:55 2004 From: carolynwhite2 at aol.com (carolynwhite2) Date: Thu, 04 Nov 2004 15:55:55 -0000 Subject: An Awful Thought In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117227 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Geoff Bannister" wrote: > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "ladyramkin2000" > wrote: > Sylvia: > > I have just finished reading a brilliant book, "End Game", which > > summarizes all the various endings that people have written to "The > > Mystery of Edwin Drood". As most people know, Dickens died > suddenly > > while less than half way through his last book, and it has been a > > happy hunting ground ever since for clues to how it was going to > end. > > (Remind you of anything?) > > Now the awful thought that struck me was: If (God forbid) Jo was > run > > over by a bus tomorrow, would we be in the same position as the > > Droodists, endlessly theorizing but never able to reach a > > satisfactory conclusion. I cant bear to think about it. > > Geoff: > If it happened tomorrow, we would have a large 1000 page book in a > few months: > > Book Five and a Half: "Harry Potter and the Parallel Universes: the > top 10 endings to the series" > > compiled by..... supply your favourite ten posters. > > :-) > Carolyn: Wishing Jo no actual harm, you understand, I think this would be a brilliant project ! They have almost re-written OOP over on HH, I think we should embark on Book 6 without delay.... From boyd.t.smythe at fritolay.com Thu Nov 4 16:10:30 2004 From: boyd.t.smythe at fritolay.com (Smythe, Boyd T {FLNA}) Date: Thu, 4 Nov 2004 10:10:30 -0600 Subject: The Power that LV Knows Not (was Ch. 30 Grawp) Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117228 > Meri wrote: > Grawp knows what he was raised in: a brutish, violent and uneducated world where strength rules. Even by the end of Order he was learning a bit. So maybe there's hope for him. It's that old nature versus nurture debate, or as DD puts it, it isn't what we are born but what we grow up to be that matters. Hagrid was raised around humans, so he's been effectively civilized. Give Grawp a little time and maybe he could fit in, too. < > Centaurs seem to consider themselves above all other things. They are very protective of their forest home, though I'm not sure how much of a claim they have to it, and they are clearly very intellegent. But they aren't flexible or understanding or willing to work against what they see as fate. The fact that they are willilng to violently defend the status quo shows that they may very well prove to be a dangerous enemy for DD, if not an ally for LV. And I think many of them are prejudiced against humans. They are not willing to accept the good in the human race and are convinced that all humans are arrogant and ignorant. < < boyd: OK, to wade back into the fray for a moment, Meri has made some interesting (and IMO spot on for centaurs) comments about two prominent WW creature races. Notice that both are different from humans not just in physical appearance, but also in beliefs, attitudes, and disposition. (And keep going, a theory lies at the bottom of this.) To whit: * Giants are strong, largely brutish, emotional and quite wild. In short, a dim reflection of some of humanity's ancestral traits. Could change in the final two books, but that's where it is now. * Centaurs are certainly far more cerebral (or at least some centaurs are). They are also inflexible, resigned to fate, and prejudiced. Hmmm. Sounds like a different reflection of man's less-noble nature. * House elves are highly magical yet the most obsequious of servants. Through Winky we see that most house elves cannot imagine a life apart from servitude and absolute obedience. Again, this sounds like another facet of human nature. * Goblins, while less developed (so far!) than the rest, appear to be planners (certainly detail oriented given Gringotts). They may also be greedy, intent on nothing so much as advancing their own power/wealth. Sounds like another human failing writ large by JKR. So what? Asked another way, why does JKR create these near-human creatures and even have Hermione intent on effecting freedom for one? JKR has created each of these races as in some way sub-human, because she intends to not only use them to delineate racism and prejudice in the WW, but also to demonstrate quite literally that a good person is a collection of all of these features. They are at times wild, but also thoughtful. They serve both others and themselves. Humanity is a balance between these opposing features. And brought together correctly, they are powerful. But how can she show us that? What better way than for them to play a key role in the defeat of the most prejudiced individuals in the WW: LV and the DEs. But do the races themselves want to come together? On the whole, no. But there are individuals from each race (except goblins so far) that are uniquely *human* in their outlook. Hagrid--and now potentially Grawp. Firenze. Dobby. Each has played an important role. Each is now at Hogwarts. Each feels protective of and indebted to Harry (that's important). And once a more human goblin enters the picture, likely in HBP (perhaps FF?), we will see the emergence of a new force that is unified in a way that the MoM statue was intended. Strong, smart, magical and cunning. So when book 7 is released, don't be surprised when a foursome of creatures makes the difference, perhaps making way for Harry's last act. After all, it was Harry that brought them all together in the first place! Apologies to any members who may have said something very close (hopefully not identical) to this--the posts I have found tend to be oriented toward single races and do not reach this same conclusion. One question: what does it mean that the MoM fountain did not include a giant? --boyd hoping this doesn't turn out to be wholly unoriginal From anita_hillin at yahoo.com Thu Nov 4 16:45:39 2004 From: anita_hillin at yahoo.com (AnitaKH) Date: Thu, 4 Nov 2004 08:45:39 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] An Awful Thought In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041104164539.27543.qmail@web42104.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 117229 ladyramkin2000 wrote: [minor pruning] Now the awful thought that struck me was: If (God forbid) Jo was run over by a bus tomorrow, would we be in the same position as the Droodists, endlessly theorizing but never able to reach a satisfactory conclusion. I cant bear to think about it. Sylvia akh: While others have come up with more clever ideas, as the boring realist, I thought I'd weigh in with my thoughts. As far as I know, Dickens didn't have a full outline of the plot; JKR, on the other hand, not only has an outline but has written the final chapter of the seventh book. While it would be a daunting task, no doubt, to wade through all her notes and ideas, she has the structure in place, so it would only be a matter of second-guessing her choice of details. Mind you, the details could provide hours of speculative fun... akh, who fully expects JKR to live another 40 years after publishing book 7. --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com/a [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From chnc1024 at AOL.COM Thu Nov 4 16:59:14 2004 From: chnc1024 at AOL.COM (chnc1024 at AOL.COM) Date: Thu, 4 Nov 2004 11:59:14 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: The only one he ever feared? Message-ID: <156.432bc597.2ebbb9e2@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 117230 In a message dated 11/4/2004 7:46:16 AM Pacific Standard Time, garybec101 at comcast.net writes: At least in America, not so much now, but years ago, people used the phrase, "God-fearing", when referring to being a "good-Christian". The term, really does not mean being afraid of God, but the "fear" portion means more like , respect, honor, reverence. Perhaps the term *feared* may be applied here. Not that Voldy is afraid of DD, in the scaredy-cat sense, but in a twisted way, has the respect, honor, reverence for him, at least for his abilities. The supreme nemesis. Becki ************************************************************************* Chancie: I think you are VERY right on this! It (at least to me) makes the fear Voldemort has of Dumbledore much more understandable! This statement as well as the one someone made about Voldemort thinks the only way Harry can only defeat him with DD's guidance, (imo) are the most plausible answers I've gotten on the subject. But there is still the question of why Voldemort doesn't seem to have any type of fear, or respect for Harry knowing only he can defeat him. Does anyone have thoughts on this? Chancie [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From chnc1024 at AOL.COM Thu Nov 4 17:21:16 2004 From: chnc1024 at AOL.COM (chnc1024 at AOL.COM) Date: Thu, 4 Nov 2004 12:21:16 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: An Awful Thought Message-ID: <1e3.2e0ef5f5.2ebbbf0c@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 117231 Sylvia wrote: If (God forbid) Jo was run over by a bus tomorrow, would we be in the same position as the Droodists, endlessly theorizing but never able to reach a satisfactory conclusion. I cant bear to think about it. ****************************************************** Chancie: That defiantly would be awful, but Jo does have all those notes and the final chapter of book 7, so we wouldn't be totally left in the dark! It would be interesting to try and figure out how all the characters got from where they are now to the final chapter, but I have a felling the discussion would turn out to be something like the ones on time-turning that I've been a part of. Everyone has their own theories and you would have 900 zillion different variations and everyone would swear that theirs is the right one. So hopefully Jo doesn't' get hit by a bus or struck by lightning, or anything for a very LONG time!!! Chancie~who thinks its great that no one thinks the same because if they didn't there would be no point in posts!!! [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From willsonkmom at msn.com Thu Nov 4 17:23:53 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Thu, 04 Nov 2004 17:23:53 -0000 Subject: Family ties. In-Reply-To: <4E29CD2D-2E79-11D9-8C41-000A9577CB94@btconnect.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117232 Kneasy wrote: snip > Tom of course is the last remaining descendant (corrected from > ancestor) of Sally. Though strictly speaking you could argue about > that. Voldy (at least part Tom and therefore some minute fraction of the original Sally, diluted over many generations) placed some of himself (not just his powers - see CoS, chap. 18) in Harry. So Harry contains at least a fraction of a fraction - not quite zero - and according to DD in the same passage this transplant accounts for Harry's "Parseltongue....resourcefulness...determination....a certain disregard for the rules,..." > Think how boring Harry would be if he wasn't part Voldy. Potioncat: I disagree...ouch, ouch (hitting my head with lamp) >From chapter 18, CoS: "You can speak Parseltongue,Harry 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." yada yada "You happen to have many qualities Salazar Slytherin prized in his hand-picked students. His very own rare gift, Parseltongue-- resourcefulness--determination--a certain disregard for rules..." LV transferred some power(s) but the only one DD mentions is Parseltongue. He mentions it at least 3 times. It's a pain to type, JKR must have had good reason to use it But the qualities of S.Slytherin...those sound an awful lot like James Potter, (heck, they sound a lot like several characters!) And DD does not say these came from LV. So I disagree that LV gave those traits to Harry. I do wonder how many more powers he sent over. >Kneasy snip Nor are links evident to everyone's favourite Potions Prof. As a Slytherin it's probable he's a pureblood, but I don't know; I have a sneaking suspicion that his background is more complicated than that. I wouldn't be surprised if there wasn't an unexpected family connection or two buried in his background. Though it'd suit some if he were descended from Herpo the Foul. Potioncat: I can't link the information...as I'm not using my own wand and do not get quite the same results...but JKR's discussion of Snape's backgroud seemed to be saying that he isn't exactly pure-blood. Only now I can't remember if this was from the last question/answer session or from her own site. She says only in rare cases would a Muggleborn enter into Slytherin says something about that being a hint...Oh, I hate it when people don't quote exactly! Can anyone help here? JKR never comes out a gives a real answer of course. Kneasy: > > It's a bit much to expect, but it'd be fun if JKR published a full > genealogy - maybe a supplement, like QTTA or FBaWTFT. > You might even find your own family in there somewhere; or that funny old woman, the one that lives down the road, the one with all the cats. Potioncat: Although she's said she won't do another book, I think publishing her notes would be a wonderful idea. Heck, she could publish the gum wrappers and we'd pour over them for clues! > From willsonkmom at msn.com Thu Nov 4 17:46:45 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Thu, 04 Nov 2004 17:46:45 -0000 Subject: Re [HPforGrownups] Umbridge was:(Umbridge,Quidditch, and the Wizarding World In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117233 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" > Carol responds: > Do we actually have canon evidence that Dumbledore saved her? Maybe > Snape did it--unwillingly but knowing it was his duty. Assuming that > he did go into the forest (and I haven't seen any compelling evidence > that he didn't act on his intention), wouldn't he have encountered the > Centaurs? Potioncat: OoP chapter 38 Dumbledore walked into the forest alone and brought her back.(quickly paraphrased) From willsonkmom at msn.com Thu Nov 4 18:20:06 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Thu, 04 Nov 2004 18:20:06 -0000 Subject: Unreliable narrator - The Snape Timeline In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117234 Neri wrote: > 8. Snape is the only Order member left at Hogwarts at the moment. The > two other Order members were attacked and removed from Hogwarts by > Umbridge just the day before. At no time during the last year were the > Order's defenses at Hogwarts so thin, and Voldemort probably knows > about it (Draco had a day to send an owl to his father, even if his > father doesn't know this already from Fudge or Umbridge). DD is > apparently not available. If there was a convenient time during this > whole year for Voldemort to act at Hogwarts, it is NOW. > > Even if Secret Agent Snape failed to see where some of these things > point to, elementary caution should have prompted him, at the very > least, to find out what Umbridge did with Harry, to update HQ about > the situation, and to ask them to check on the guard in the DoM. Not > doing any of these for several hours is, dare I say it, slightly > irresponsible. > Potioncat: Well, you almost convinced me. Fortunately, I went on and read the other posts identified as part of the thread. (Boy! That was close!) So, I actually think you have a good point. Of course, none of us know who broke the flask (oops, wrong thread) None of us know what Snape was doing or why he was doing it and what we imagine he was doing depends on what kind of person we think he really is. But I have this question. Why does DD continue to support Snape if Snape was being irresponsible? You would think if DD doubted Snape he would say, "Well, the rescue did take a little longer than I would have hoped." Potioncat: Is there a magical explanation for why my computer crashes when interesting posts are flying like owls and JKR updates her site? From doddiemoemoe at yahoo.com Thu Nov 4 18:49:28 2004 From: doddiemoemoe at yahoo.com (doddiemoemoe) Date: Thu, 04 Nov 2004 18:49:28 -0000 Subject: Dumbledore In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117235 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "ginnysthe1" wrote: > > Juli wrote: > > > I believe DD knows a LOT more than we believe, he seems to > know everything that happens in Hogwarts, even before things > happen. > > Christopher wrote in response: > > >Well, there's always everybody's favourite, the Time-Turner! I don't > see why everyone dislikes them. Time travel isn't that difficult to > understand, especially if you imagine time as a pseudo-spatial two- > dimensional graph, and then graph absolute time on one axis and > timeline branches on the other ... but I digress. Back to the point: > Dumbledore's apparent omniscience. He's already demonstrated a > willingness to use time travel both to aide a student in her > education (I highly, *highly* doubt that devices like Time Turners > are free for professors to hand out even to students like Hermione, > at least not without some paperwork) and to save lives. Who's to say > that he doesn't use one to monitor his school?< > > Kim chimes in here: > > Speaking only for myself, not everyone dislikes time-turners! I > think in the hands of one such as Dumbledore, they could be very > powerful, useful tools, though way more unpredictable than at first > thought. After all, it takes a really bright (and it goes without > saying, responsible) wizard or witch to use them properly without > risking messing everything up, which shows us the high regard DD and > McGonagall have for Hermione. It just stands to reason that DD uses > a time turner himself on occasion. > > Christopher continued: > > >And then there's an idea that you [Juli] came so close to hitting, > but you missed. It gave me the idea, though. We've seen in OotP (and > probably elsewhere, but since I've finished reading OotP most > recently, it's the book freshest in my mind) that photograph > inhabitants are free to roam to other photographs -- they're not even > restricted to their own. And, since photograph inhabitants are > apparently limited in what they *can* do, I don't see it as too much > of a stretch that many of them would lend themselves to gossipping. > Hence, I see it as entirely possible that one of the myriad and > sundry photograph inhabitants would be able to keep Dumbledore -- or > anyone else for that matter -- fully apprised of any usual or unusual > goings-on.< > > Kim again: > > The only problem I can see with picture-traveling is the limitation > that comes from some rooms having pictures and some not. I don't > think all the castle walls are covered with pictures and photos. And > then there's the problem pictures present with seeing things that go > on outside the castle. And with frog-card pictures, which could go > outside, what would you do if you were in someone's pocket all the > time? But in that case I suppose you could still at least hear what > was being said. > > Christopher continued: > > >And then there's also the possibility that Dumbledore himself has > some intrinsic ability of which we're not aware. Perhaps he has some > sort of ability to perceive the future? This would possibly explain a > lot of his actions regarding Trelawney. It would possibly impart to > him knowledge of how difficult true prophecy is and thus he would > have more respect for the otherwise mostly fraudulent Trelawney.< > > Kim's last remark: > > I recall others on the list coming up with the idea of Dumbledore > possibly having the intrinsic ability to become a bumblebee (i.e. his > animagus), especially since that's what "Dumbledore" means. As a > bee, he could literally be a "fly on the wall" and see what others > are up to without them knowing it. Of course, on closer > examination, there are still some problems with that too: Wouldn't > people notice the buzzing of a bee? Wouldn't a bee (being a warm- > weather creature) freeze if he went outside to keep watch on folks > during the winter months? How would a bee keep from getting smashed > or eaten by Crookshanks? Or maybe DD isn't a bee, but some other bug > (such as Rita "Skeeter" was a beetle, not a mosquito). And how has > he kept his animagus ability secret for all these years if he indeed > has the ability? Being a bee or other bug may be only one of > several omniscient capabilities DD possesses. In any case, IMO > Dumbledore has an animagus (just as the current transfig. teacher > McGonagall's is a cat), but JKR just hasn't mentioned his animagus > yet. I'd love to see more discussion of this. > > Cheers, > Kim One thing regarding animagi that floats around in the back of my mind is the few times Harry noted he heard a hum of a wasp in the background. I believe one time was in Trelawney's classroom in GOF before he "fell out", felt ill(head/scar ache) and left the classroom. Another time was during the History of Magic OWL exam when before he had the vision of Sirius in the MOM. I think there may have been other instances. I just found it odd that anyone would notice the sound of a wasp buzzing around also odd that JKR would mention it. If the wasp is an animagi, who is it buzzing around? DD? LV? some DE? Doddiemoe --who knows wasps and bees are not the same but they both make that buzzing sound when they fly. From khinterberg at yahoo.com Thu Nov 4 18:51:51 2004 From: khinterberg at yahoo.com (khinterberg) Date: Thu, 04 Nov 2004 18:51:51 -0000 Subject: Family ties. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117236 Kneasy said: > Nor are links evident to everyone's favourite Potions Prof. As a > Slytherin it's probable he's a pureblood, but I don't know; I have > a sneaking suspicion that his background is more complicated than > that. I wouldn't be surprised if there wasn't an unexpected family > connection or two buried in his background. Though it'd suit some > if he were descended from Herpo the Foul. > > Potioncat: > I can't link the information...as I'm not using my own wand and do > not get quite the same results...but JKR's discussion of Snape's > backgroud seemed to be saying that he isn't exactly pure-blood. > > Only now I can't remember if this was from the last question/answer > session or from her own site. > > She says only in rare cases would a Muggleborn enter into Slytherin > says something about that being a hint...Oh, I hate it when people > don't quote exactly! Can anyone help here? JKR never comes out a > gives a real answer of course. > > Here is the quote potioncat: Apart from Harry, Snape is my favourite character because he is so complex and I just love him. Can he see the Thestrals, and if so, why? Also, is he a pure blood wizard? Snape's ancestry is hinted at. He was a Death Eater, so clearly he is no Muggle born, because Muggle borns are not allowed to be Death Eaters, except in rare circumstances. You have some information about his ancestry there. He can see Thestrals, but in my imagination most of the older people at Hogwarts would be able to see them because, obviously, as you go through life you do lose people and understand what death is. But you must not forget that Snape was a Death Eater. He will have seen things that Why do you love him? Why do people love Snape? I do not understand this. Again, it's bad boy syndrome, isn't it? It's very depressing. [Laughter]. One of my best friends watched the film and she said, "You know who's really attractive?" I said, "Who?" She said, "Lucius Malfoy!" This is from the Edinburgh book festival on August 15, 2004. The full transcript is here: http://www.jkrowling.com/textonly/news_view.cfm?id=80 Hope this helps! khinterberg From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Thu Nov 4 18:57:56 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Thu, 04 Nov 2004 18:57:56 -0000 Subject: Unreliable narrator - The Snape Timeline In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117237 > Potioncat: snip. Of course, > none of us know who broke the flask (oops, wrong thread) None of us > know what Snape was doing or why he was doing it and what we imagine > he was doing depends on what kind of person we think he really is. Alla: True, true, of course you are right. :) Unfortunately nobody knows what Snape thinks yet. :) That is why we able to come up with so many different interpretations, BUT what I had been arguing that some of his actions are malicious and sadistic on its own, no matter what kind of intent lies behind it. Potioncat: > But I have this question. Why does DD continue to support Snape if > Snape was being irresponsible? You would think if DD doubted Snape > he would say, "Well, the rescue did take a little longer than I > would have hoped." > Alla: Is the first part of the paragraph refers to Dumbledore's trust in Snape in general or just int his episode? If we are talking about this episode, I would argue that Dumbledore saw no need to further stimulate Harry's anger and hate and would not say anything, even if he thought that Snape's behaviour is irresponsible. If we are talking about Dumbledore's trust in GENERAL, I liked Flinwitch's post which argued that despite the fact that Dumbledore keeps repeating that he trusts Snape, NOWHERE in the books did he say that he LIKES Snape or he SUPPORTS Snape, or that Harry needs to given him ANY kind of respect, other then calling him Professor. I loved the argument that if Snape is in school in order for kids to learn how to deal with nasty people, it is possible that Dumbledore is teaching Snape some kind of lesson too and if Snape does not like his students attitude about him, he has to deal with it or maybe ... adjust his behaviour somehow. > Potioncat: Is there a magical explanation for why my computer > crashes when interesting posts are flying like owls and JKR updates > her site? Alla: Sorry. :( Can't help you with that. From willsonkmom at msn.com Thu Nov 4 19:01:14 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Thu, 04 Nov 2004 19:01:14 -0000 Subject: snape torturing Harry wasRe: Chapter 29, - Broken Potion In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117238 >Mcmaxslb wrote: > > I despise him. Snape has been a complete s#!+ to Harry > from the first moment that they met and he has though his treatment > of Harry created such animosity between them that Snivellus has hurt, > indeed almost lost, the cause that he is supposed to be fighting for > and it is 100% Snape's fault. He didn't try to teach Harry > Occlumency. He just used the opportunity to torture him! If Snivellus > had done the job properly then Voldemort wouldn't have been able to > lure Harry to the MoM in the first place. Now some of the blame is > Dumbledore's. He should've know that Snape wouldn't do the job right. > I hope that in HBP that there is a scene in which Dumbledore takes > Snively to task and tells him to grow up. Potioncat: Ok, you're allowed to dispise Snape. He is somewhat lacking in social graces. I disagree that he tortured Harry in Occlumency lessons. As I read it, he remains distant and firm. But he doesn't throw anything back at Harry. The question about the dog seems more a real interest as I read it, or an attempt, possibly, to bring up one of the less embarrassing memories.Harry has afterall, just asked if Snape saw the bits of memory. I don't think he failed to teach Harry on purpose. So far, the only person I remember DD dressing down is Fudge. DD could take a few lessons from McGonagall. She knows the value of "character-building consequences." I also think if I started to read HP now, I wouldn't like Snape. My daughter has a coach who is making her life miserable. But when I did start SS/PS, it was "spoiled" for me that Snape wasn't the bad guy and I've been intrigued by his actions and possible motives ever sinse then. Potioncat: please disregard typos and spelling errors. I'm having a heck of a time reading the monitor. From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Thu Nov 4 19:08:02 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Thu, 04 Nov 2004 19:08:02 -0000 Subject: snape torturing Harry wasRe: Chapter 29, - Broken Potion In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117239 > Potioncat: > Ok, you're allowed to dispise Snape. He is somewhat lacking in > social graces. > Alla: Heeee! Potioncat: snip. > I also think if I started to read HP now, I wouldn't like Snape. My > daughter has a coach who is making her life miserable. But when I > did start SS/PS, it was "spoiled" for me that Snape wasn't the bad > guy and I've been intrigued by his actions and possible motives ever > sinse then. Alla: After these words, I love you even more, if it is possible. I perfectly understand the liking of Snape as fictional character , because no matter how much I want to strangle him, I definitely think that Rowling did a very fine job creating him. And I definitely don't want him out of the story, because then I would have nobody to shout at. (I wish Voldemort would have been just as good... Sigh.) When we start saying that what he is doing to kids is OK, because he has many other good and more important qualities (and he definitely has good qualities), then I want to argue. :) From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Thu Nov 4 19:58:03 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Thu, 04 Nov 2004 19:58:03 -0000 Subject: Chapter 29, Career Advice - Broken Potion In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117240 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "mcmaxslb" wrote: I despise him. Snape has been a complete s#!+ to Harry > from the first moment that they met and he has though his treatment > of Harry created such animosity between them that Snivellus has hurt, > indeed almost lost, the cause that he is supposed to be fighting for > and it is 100% Snape's fault. Alla: Dear, oh, dear. See I am in complete agreement with this part of your post(except despising - I partially despise and partially love Snape :o)), but I cannot help but not to find your argument in general to be very credible because of its next part. Mcmaxslb: He didn't try to teach Harry > Occlumency. He just used the opportunity to torture him! If Snivellus > had done the job properly then Voldemort wouldn't have been able to > lure Harry to the MoM in the first place. Alla: It LOOKS like Snape did not do a good job of teaching Harry. If you can show me where in canon we can find "Occlumency for Dummies, 101", which states exactly, how Occlumency is supposed to be taught, I will eat my words. Right now, I would say we don't know it for sure. It is possible that relaxation was the first step and Snape did not do it, but it is also possible that direct assault was the necessary first step of teaching that subject. Mcmaxslb: Now some of the blame is > Dumbledore's. He should've know that Snape wouldn't do the job right. Alla: No kidding. :o) Mcmaxslb: > I hope that in HBP that there is a scene in which Dumbledore takes > Snively to task and tells him to grow up. Alla: Hmmm. I hope for that scene too, but I somehow doubt that we are going to get it. From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com Thu Nov 4 20:20:37 2004 From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (arrowsmithbt) Date: Thu, 04 Nov 2004 20:20:37 -0000 Subject: Family ties. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117241 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "potioncat" wrote: > > Potioncat: > I disagree...ouch, ouch (hitting my head with lamp) > From chapter 18, CoS: > "You can speak Parseltongue,Harry 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." > > yada yada > > "You happen to have many qualities Salazar Slytherin prized in his > hand-picked students. His very own rare gift, Parseltongue-- > resourcefulness--determination--a certain disregard for rules..." > > LV transferred some power(s) but the only one DD mentions is > Parseltongue. He mentions it at least 3 times. It's a pain to > type, JKR must have had good reason to use it > Kneasy: But there's a bit you missed out: "Voldemort put a bit of himself in me?" Harry said, thunderstruck. "It certainly seems so." That, combined with listing the qualities prized by Slytherin with no indication that these weren't also passed across at the same time. Powers are different. There's only one we know of so far (Parseltongue) though DD does say that powers (plural) were transferred. Now others may disagree, but I reckon "...a bit of Voldemort.." is not the same thing as "Voldemort's powers." I think the former phrase was used very deliberately. Powers per se are not a problem, they can be used without hazard to the recipient (so long as he can control them). But a bit of Voldy is a different cauldron of toads; it implies much more than just being able to cast an unusual spell or two. IMO it's what allows the link, often at considerable distances, much further than shown between any other pair, between Harry and Voldy. The Dark Mark calls his disciples; but it doesn't affect their minds, only their arms. Voldy can stroll round Harry's mind because he has a foothold there already. Part of Harry's mind *is* part of Voldy. > > Potioncat: > I can't link the information...as I'm not using my own wand and do > not get quite the same results...but JKR's discussion of Snape's > backgroud seemed to be saying that he isn't exactly pure-blood. > > Only now I can't remember if this was from the last question/answer > session or from her own site. > > She says only in rare cases would a Muggleborn enter into Slytherin > says something about that being a hint...Oh, I hate it when people > don't quote exactly! Can anyone help here? JKR never comes out a > gives a real answer of course. > Kneasy: Pureblood is different to Muggle born is different to mudblood. Sometimes labels are useful, sometimes they restrict. Two or three generations back and a dalliance with a Muggle milkman ruins a pureblood pedigree. But that wouldn't make the later descendents Muggleborn. Far enough back and it'd be difficult to call them mudblood. Harry isn't Muggleborn - but he was thought suitable for Slytherin, even though Lily came from Muggles (we think). No; I'm convinced that whatever Snape's motivation is for swapping sides (and most agree that there must be a strong one) I reckon it's *personal*, something to do with family. It's not such a giant leap to wonder if his family had interesting connections. From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Thu Nov 4 20:51:43 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Thu, 04 Nov 2004 20:51:43 -0000 Subject: Harry's moral core vs. Voldie's In-Reply-To: <20041104062951.68845.qmail@web53109.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117242 Kelsey wrote : " But remember, Harry didn't know that his parents sacrificed their lives for him until he was 11 years old. And he didn't really know the full extent of that until his third year. And we don't know the circumstances of the death of Tom's Slytherin-heir mother (who fell in love with a Muggle). [insert outrageous theory about her sacrificial death here]. I think that, deep in the psyche of these two children, the abandonment issues are _about_ equal." Del replies : Not necessarily. Harry was loved during 15 months. Tom might not have been. This could be enough to create a major difference between the two. Kelsey wrote : " Both needed care, attention, and love at a young age, and it shows later in their lives when they desire attention at Hogwarts, and then the differences exist in how they seek to gain that attention." Del replies : They both desire attention, but not necessarily in the same way. Harry primarily desires love, friendship, trust, acceptance. We have no evidence that Tom ever desired, or even valued, those things. This would be in accordance with the theory that he was never loved as an infant and as a consequence never learned to bond and love. Kelsey wrote : " But this, I can't quite grasp. Why would he care if his father abandoned him if he never loved him at all? Why would he care about gaining attention or power or followers?" Del replies : The feeling of abandonment is not necessarily connected with love. My own biological father left the scene long before I was born. I never met him, I didn't have pictures or anything. My mother knew that he was gone for good and she never entertained any fantasy in me of the father who will come bach some day. I never could love the man, because I simply don't know him at all. I don't really hate him either, for the same reasons. But do I feel abandoned ? Yes. Did it have a strong influence on my life ? Yes. Did I try to compensate ? Yes. It's not whether or not Tom loved his father that matters : it's the fact that this father *should* have loved him. He didn't, he abandoned him. This is a terrible blow for a child. Kelsey wrote : " If Voldie lacks that ability to love, I guess he can't really be molded by his nurturing, but that its part of his nature (i.e. he never had the ability, so it could never be developed)." Del replies : But is it that he never had the ability, or is it that this latent ability was never developed by his caretakers and finally died ? Or maybe a mix of the two ? Infants need to be loved, they need to bond with someone. Most of them will find someone or even something to bond with, even in the most horrible circumstances. But is it possible that Baby Tom had an inborn difficulty to bond, and that some kind of loveless upbringing never provided the right stimulation for him to learn to bond and love ? That's a lot of speculation, granted. But when we discuss someone as abnormal as Tom Riddle, we are forced to speculate. Normal people can become evil, but they always *love* someone or something. Even Hitler and Staline did. But not Tom Riddle. Del From willsonkmom at msn.com Thu Nov 4 21:09:47 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Thu, 04 Nov 2004 21:09:47 -0000 Subject: Family ties. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117243 > Kneasy: > But there's a bit you missed out: > "Voldemort put a bit of himself in me?" Harry said, thunderstruck. > "It certainly seems so." > That, combined with listing the qualities prized by Slytherin with no > indication that these weren't also passed across at the same time. > Powers are different. There's only one we know of so far (Parseltongue) > though DD does say that powers (plural) were transferred. > > Now others may disagree, but I reckon "...a bit of Voldemort.." is not > the same thing as "Voldemort's powers." I think the former phrase > was used very deliberately. > > Powers per se are not a problem, they can be used without hazard > to the recipient (so long as he can control them). But a bit of Voldy > is a different cauldron of toads; it implies much more than just being > able to cast an unusual spell or two. IMO it's what allows the link, > often at considerable distances, much further than shown between any > other pair, between Harry and Voldy. The Dark Mark calls his disciples; > but it doesn't affect their minds, only their arms. > Voldy can stroll round Harry's mind because he has a foothold there > already. > Part of Harry's mind *is* part of Voldy. Potioncat: Oh, I agree there's a bit of LV in Harry,and I didn't mean it was only the Parseltongue. I think Snape has been looking for something of LV in Potter all along. And there will likely be more bits showing up in books 6 & 7.(Wasn't there a thread about that...of course, let's face it, there's been a thread about everything.) But I think the resourcefulness, disregard for rules and whatever the other was (snipped too well) are from James. Discribes him perfectly. > > > > > > Kneasy: > Pureblood is different to Muggle born is different to mudblood. > Sometimes labels are useful, sometimes they restrict. > Two or three generations back and a dalliance with a Muggle milkman > ruins a pureblood pedigree. But that wouldn't make the later descendents > Muggleborn. Far enough back and it'd be difficult to call them mudblood. > Harry isn't Muggleborn - but he was thought suitable for Slytherin, even > though Lily came from Muggles (we think). > > No; I'm convinced that whatever Snape's motivation is for swapping > sides (and most agree that there must be a strong one) I reckon it's > *personal*, something to do with family. It's not such a giant leap to > wonder if his family had interesting connections. Potioncat: We agree here. There must be some surprising connection. And I wouldn't be surprised to discover that Snape was Halfblood like Harry. He's a prince of a man too, everyone says so.... (No, I'm not serious about the last part.) From ginnysthe1 at yahoo.com Thu Nov 4 21:19:09 2004 From: ginnysthe1 at yahoo.com (ginnysthe1) Date: Thu, 04 Nov 2004 21:19:09 -0000 Subject: The only one he ever feared? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117244 Becki wrote (in her sign-off): "Becki (who bets a bundle that there was a prophecy about Voldys upcoming birth)" Kim comments: You think you've read nearly all the clever ideas possible, and then someone comes up with another one! It sure seems likely that a wizard of Dumbledore's wisdom, skill, not to mention advanced age, would have somehow known that Voldemort would be on the way eventually. Why not a prophecy about the Dark Lord's birth, as Becki suggests? Trelawney's prophecy about Harry's birth (and defeat of Voldemort) was only one of many on the shelves in the Dept. of Mysteries, wasn't it? What's in all those other prophecy balls (spheres?)? Definitely worth thinking about! Kim From ginnysthe1 at yahoo.com Thu Nov 4 21:33:28 2004 From: ginnysthe1 at yahoo.com (ginnysthe1) Date: Thu, 04 Nov 2004 21:33:28 -0000 Subject: The only one he ever feared? In-Reply-To: <156.432bc597.2ebbb9e2@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117245 Chancie asked: "But there is still the question of why Voldemort doesn't seem to have any type of fear, or respect for Harry knowing only he can defeat him. Does anyone have thoughts on this?" Kim responds: Well, maybe one thing is that Voldemort has the typical disrespect many of the older generation have for the younger, of which Harry is a member. It could also partly be a mind-game he's playing with someone he believes will be able to vanquish him one day, i.e. a way to try to undermine Harry psychologically. Or it could be just a false front (in a lot of ways I see Voldemort as the ultimate false front, like the perennial bully who hides a fearful child inside himself). That is, maybe Voldemort is pretending not to fear or respect Harry because down inside he (Voldemort) is really petrified of Harry. Someone who craves power and immortality the way Voldemort does is deeply motivated by fear IMO. Kim From chnc1024 at AOL.COM Thu Nov 4 21:35:50 2004 From: chnc1024 at AOL.COM (chnc1024 at AOL.COM) Date: Thu, 4 Nov 2004 16:35:50 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: The only one he ever feared? Message-ID: <15c.4293eeee.2ebbfab6@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 117246 In a message dated 11/4/2004 1:22:42 PM Pacific Standard Time, ginnysthe1 at yahoo.com writes: Becki wrote (in her sign-off): "Becki (who bets a bundle that there was a prophecy about Voldys upcoming birth)" *************************************************************** Kim comments: It sure seems likely that a wizard of Dumbledore's wisdom, would have somehow known that Voldemort would be on the way Trelawney's prophecy about Harry's birth (and defeat of Voldemort) was only one of many on the shelves in the Dept. of Mysteries, wasn't it? What's in all those other prophecy balls (spheres?)? Definitely worth thinking about! Kim ***************************************************************** Chancie: I definitly agree! Perhaps thats also why Tom Riddle says everyone trusted him except Dumbledore after he opened the CoS and why Dumbledore know's Tom Riddle/Voldemort is one and the same! Maybe he heard a prophecy that said that Salizar Slytherin's decendent would com to finish his work...kinda like what Tom Riddle says in the Chamber....Question. Do you think Voldemort know's if there was a prophecy? Could this be how he found out he was/is Slytherin's decendent? If so, how did Voldemort find out?? Chancie [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From ginnysthe1 at yahoo.com Thu Nov 4 21:55:28 2004 From: ginnysthe1 at yahoo.com (ginnysthe1) Date: Thu, 04 Nov 2004 21:55:28 -0000 Subject: The only one he ever feared? In-Reply-To: <20041104042834.59641.qmail@web53102.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117247 Juli was making a lot of sense when wrote: "... maybe one of the three times the Potters faced LV and got away, he may have seen something in her [Lily's] eyes, I don't think it could be love, it could have been that same power Harry has, and as he is not able to handle it (as we saw during the brief possession at the MoM) and hates it, so he could have thought: I'll kill him now while he's a baby and his power's not fully developed. As he knew Lily also had the power, that's why he was reluctant to kill her, he may have known she was too much for him, but because she sacrificed herself for Harry, he was able to kill her but not Harry. Am I making any sense?" And caused Kim to ask another question: Juli, are you saying, that in the act of her dying to save Harry, that Lily passed on that power *completely* to Harry, and so LV was then able to kill her, but Harry was now "immune" to LV like his mother had been? Maybe Lily passed on part of her very essence to Harry when she died, so as a result his eyes turned green like hers. Maybe Harry'd have grown up blue- or brown-eyed otherwise? I guess we've all more or less agreed that Lily passed on the "ancient magic" to Harry when she died, but I hadn't seen it quite in this particular light before. But I do think that the ancient magic may in fact be love -- not love so much in the sentimental or romantic sense, but in the sense of the all-encompassing power of life, including the acceptance of life on life's terms, as well as the acceptance of death as a part of life. Voldemort shows he can clearly accept neither, though by the end of the story I'm sure he will have to (at least I think I'm sure... ;-)) Kim From bboyminn at yahoo.com Thu Nov 4 21:58:01 2004 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Thu, 04 Nov 2004 21:58:01 -0000 Subject: Hogwarts Uniform with Link - OT In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117248 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "potioncat" wrote: > > Potioncat: > ...edited... > > For that matter, has anyone ever tried to write with a quill? It's > very difficult. I think the Muggle-born would be making a real mess > of things, having to suddenly use them. (No wonder the Patil twins > sneak in pencils.) bboyminn: I've often wondered, 'why quills?'. Wondered to such a degree that I researched the history of writing instruments. But, let's not get ahead of ourselves. I can't imagine myself going to Hogwarts and stuggling away with feather quills. At best, under normal use, a quill is only good for about a week, and during that week requires frequent resharpening. This frequent resharpening has given rise to the infamous 'pen-knife'. I think part of the reason for 'why quills' is to give Hogwarts and aura of familiarity. Pointed hat, bats, Holloween celebrations, long robes, riding brooms, long crooked noses, etc... are all things we associate with witches and JKR has provided them for a comfortable familiarity. I personally found Tolkin very difficult to read specifically because everything was so unfamiliar it became difficult to keep track of it all. But JKR gives us everyday normal muggle life with all it's familiar icons and images, but with a twist. To the history of writing instruments; these are actually relatively modern inventions. The pencil was first introduce in the late 1500's to early 1600's. The first immediate replacement for the feather quill were steel tipped 'dip' pens (steel nib on a wooden stick dipped in ink) were introduced sometime in the 1800's, dates are unclear but I suspect in the early half of the 1800's. Various attempts as fountain pens date back to a Frenchman name Bion as early as 1792. And in this period many attempts were made to make it practical, but it wasn't until 1884 when Lewis Waterman patented the first truly practical fountain pen. Other notable fountain pen inventors were... -Peregrin Williamson, a Baltimore shoemaker, received the first American patent for a pen in 1809. -John Scheffer received a British patent in 1819 for his half quill, half metal pen that he attempted to mass manufacture. -John Jacob Parker patented the first self-filling fountain pen in 1831. Unfortunately these earlier attempt had the nasty habit of leaking ink all over everything within a 10 foot radius. It wasn't until Waterman that a pen was invented with a special support for the metal nib that allowed the ink to be wicked effectively down to the tip without leaking all over the place. For the record, a Hungarian journalist named Laszlo Biro invented the first ballpoint pen in 1938. Although, the principle of the ballpoint pen actually dates back to an 1888 patent owned by John J. Loud for a product to mark leather. However, this patent was commercially unexploited. So, back to Hogwarts, I can't imagine modern muggle kids putting up with the tedious struggle of writing with quills; messy, slow, and tedious. Personally I would have smuggled in a pen, and if the teachers objected, perhaps they like the nice calligraphic writing style of quills, I would have switched to a nice calligraphy tipped fountain pen. The wizard world to some extent seems trapped in the 1700's, although the robe clothing style is probably older than that. So, metal tipped pens would be a later invention, but still, it has to be miserable using a feather quill on a daily basis. Ultimately, all fiction (book, TV, film) tends to overlook these tedious little problems in order to keep the plot moving along. Not sure what that is all worth, but there it is. Steve/bboyminn (was bboy_mn) From ginnysthe1 at yahoo.com Thu Nov 4 22:10:59 2004 From: ginnysthe1 at yahoo.com (ginnysthe1) Date: Thu, 04 Nov 2004 22:10:59 -0000 Subject: The only one he ever feared? In-Reply-To: <15c.4293eeee.2ebbfab6@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117249 Kim wrote: >> It sure seems likely that a wizard of Dumbledore's wisdom would have somehow known that Voldemort would be on the way Trelawney's prophecy about Harry's birth (and defeat of Voldemort) was only one of many on the shelves in the Dept. of Mysteries, wasn't it? What's in all those other prophecy balls (spheres?)?<< Chancie replied: >> I definitely agree! Perhaps thats also why Tom Riddle says everyone trusted him except Dumbledore after he opened the CoS and why Dumbledore know's Tom Riddle/Voldemort is one and the same! Maybe he heard a prophecy that said that Salizar Slytherin's decendent would come to finish his work...kinda like what Tom Riddle says in the Chamber....Question. Do you think Voldemort know's if there was a prophecy? Could this be how he found out he was/is Slytherin's decendent? If so, how did Voldemort find out??<< Kim replies: I think we may be on to something! From the prophecy about "the coming of the Dark Lord" or "Slytherin's heir" maybe DD wouldn't have known exactly who that Dark Lord would be, but he might have put two and two together when he saw what kind of student Tom Riddle really was. And the Dark Lord prophecy might have mentioned certain specifics, like a time when the Dark Lord would appear, etc., that would have pointed to Tom Riddle being the one. Kind of like the way Harry's prophecy didn't mention Harry's name, but did mention the circumstances of his birth. And doesn't OotP show that only the ones about whom the prophecy is written can open the prophecy sphere? So maybe TR went to the Ministry years before, found the "Dark Lord" sphere and opened it? Kim From spotthedungbeetle at hotmail.com Thu Nov 4 22:41:09 2004 From: spotthedungbeetle at hotmail.com (dungrollin) Date: Thu, 04 Nov 2004 22:41:09 -0000 Subject: CHAPTER DISCUSSION: Chapter 30 (Grawp) In-Reply-To: <004901c4c165$2c90c7c0$1502a8c0@TOSHIBALAPTOP> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117250 Debbie wrote: 5. Hagrid calls Grawp "harmless" even though Grawp caused Hagrid's injuries. He needs to be tied down. Harry doubts he could ever be permitted to mingle with humans. Is this a signal to reassess Hermione's conclusion in GoF that wizarding attitudes toward giants is "just prejudice"? Do Grawp's circumstances cause or contribute to his wildness? Dungrollin replies: Aah... Grawpy. Personally, I've got a great deal of sympathy for Hagrid's fondness for interestin' creatures. I wanted to know far more about the blast-ended skrewts, for example, yes, and erumpents, flobberworms, tebos, clabberts and whatnot. (Having kept ferrets at one time, Jarveys sound like particular fun). And I'm a mite concerned about Buckbeak, shut up in that room, with no air and no exercise. Fang, Crookshanks and Hedwig on the other hand, I find quite dull. Yes... Magizoology would be just my kind of thing. I have a great deal of respect for Hagrid and his knack with magical creatures. He's the only person in Britain who's managed to train thestrals, he's gained the trust of unicorns, and single- handedly bringing a reluctant Grawp back from wherever the giants were... That's rather impressive, in my book. (And as for Newt Scamander ? JKR is apparently as much a fan of Gerald Durrell as I am. I recently re-read Fillets of Plaice, and laughed so much I was nearly sick ? one of the reasons I've never been able to take Lawrence Durrell seriously.) But back to Hagrid, Grawp, and the giants in general: I think they're great (particularly Grawpy). Wouldn't call them harmless though. That's where Hagrid's problem lies. He anthropomorphises. And he assumes that because he likes them, they like him. Moreover, he's half-giant: difficult to harm and very strong, so he's got a better shot at keeping rogue monsters under control than have the rest of us (sorry, I mean *them*). He simply doesn't understand why other wizards don't share his partiality for the less cuddly fauna. (Again, I sympathise with him. I just don't get arachnophobes, entomophobes and people afraid of all things creepy or slimy ? though animals which pose a significant threat are a different kettle of plimpies. [Pauses to sweat a little at the memory of a charging elephant...]) The attitude of wizards in general towards the giants, however, strikes me as a little over the top. "They're just vicious." (? Ron, GoF). Vicious is entirely the wrong word. Hagrid's right, Grawp doesn't mean any harm (unless you piss him off), he really doesn't know his own strength in relation to humans. Just as wizards would be wrong if they expect giants to behave like humans (a perfectly normal anthropomorphising attitude to something with two legs and a capability for language, but utterly inappropriate), giants would expect humans to behave like giants, and are surprised when a thump that would be a friendly gesture to one of their own ends up being nearly fatal. I'm not sure that Hermione's assertion that it's 'just prejudice' is right, though it's probably a contributing factor, based on the giants position in the last Voldywar. It's more likely to be a misconception about the species in general. It's quite a normal human reaction to humanoids, as far as I can see. Chimps look cute and cuddly - but anyone who's seen them up close and in a bad mood knows that they can be really scary, not to mention dangerous. Considering the care with which the magical community has hidden other fabulous beasts from Muggles (introduction, FBAWTFT), it strikes me as rather a glaring double-standard that the giants should be forced to live so close together, in conditions that are unsuitable for them and will lead to their extinction. (Does FBAWTFT classify them as beings or beasts? I don't recall...) They're not calculating enough to be called evil, and they're not clever enough to understand fighting for a moral cause. They do respond to how well they're treated by wizards, though. But they were on the wrong side in VW1, and this is apparently enough for the WW to condemn the species to the dustbin. >From the Edinburgh Book Festival: `Will Hagrid ever succeed with his plans for his brother?' JKR: `In a limited way, yes. Grawp is obviously the very stupidest thing that Hagrid ever brought home. In his long line of bringing home stupid things [...] but ironically it might be the one time that a monstrous something came good. By the next book, Grawp is a little bit more controllable.' Three cheers for Hagrid! Good luck to him, I say. Dungrollin. "The premise of expressionism suggests that the Constitution is a legal fiction, but only if reality is distinct from art; if that is not the case, consciousness, ironically, has objective value." ? The Postmodernism Generator, www.elsewhere.org/cgi-bin/postmodern From khinterberg at yahoo.com Thu Nov 4 22:49:05 2004 From: khinterberg at yahoo.com (khinterberg) Date: Thu, 04 Nov 2004 22:49:05 -0000 Subject: The only one he ever feared? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117251 > > Kim replies: > > I think we may be on to something! From the prophecy about "the > coming of the Dark Lord" or "Slytherin's heir" maybe DD wouldn't have > known exactly who that Dark Lord would be, but he might have put two > and two together when he saw what kind of student Tom Riddle really > was. And the Dark Lord prophecy might have mentioned certain > specifics, like a time when the Dark Lord would appear, etc., that > would have pointed to Tom Riddle being the one. Kind of like the way > Harry's prophecy didn't mention Harry's name, but did mention the > circumstances of his birth. And doesn't OotP show that only the ones > about whom the prophecy is written can open the prophecy sphere? So > maybe TR went to the Ministry years before, found the "Dark Lord" > sphere and opened it? > > Kim khinterberg here: If there was a prophecy about the coming of Voldemort and he himself found out about it, how would Dumbledore find out about it? Did he witness it? Did someone tell him? Or was his name involved as well, so he could pick it up and touch it? khinterberg From bboyminn at yahoo.com Thu Nov 4 22:49:49 2004 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Thu, 04 Nov 2004 22:49:49 -0000 Subject: Why were Harry's parents so rich? - Book of Knowledge In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117252 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "finwitch" wrote: > > > Finwitch: > > We *might* learn this, if Harry gets his hands on Potter-family-tree. > (He's seen Sirius', but who's to say he won't see his own in HBP?) > The family-tree (or it's copy) could be in Potter-vault for example? > Or Harry's getting royalties from Quidditch-shops and investigates > due to a bank-raport, possibly urged by Hermione? > > ...edited.. > > BTW, if they were *rich*, did they have any house-elves? And if they > did have, where are they now? > > Finwitch bboyminn: No big point to make here, just a bit of interesting Data. - OotP Am Hb Pg 116 - ...a many-legged pair of tweesers ...scuttled up Harry's arm ...and attempted to puncture his skin; Sirius ...smashed it with a heavy book entitled [insert sound of jubilant trumpets here] NATURE's NOBILITY: A WIZARDING GENEALOGY. - - end quote - - "Nature's Nobility: A Wizarding Genealogy", I always thought that might be an excellent place for Harry to look for details about lots of people's genealogy. I also think it's a bit odd that JKR would insert that particular book right after we find out about Sirius's genealogy. I've always felt that book was planted at that point as one of those clues that JKR sneaks in, but we the reader regard as forgetably insignificant, only to be hit over the head with it later. It's just a thought. Steve/bboyminn (was bboy_mn) From tim at marvinhold.com Thu Nov 4 23:44:45 2004 From: tim at marvinhold.com (Tim) Date: Thu, 04 Nov 2004 23:44:45 -0000 Subject: Harry, Hermione, Sirius, and the Dream, 2-way mirror In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117253 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "pippin_999" wrote: > > Pippin: > JKR has said the mirror wouldn't have been as useful as you > think...I'm afraid that if Sirius and James had them, Pettigrew had > one too, so that line of communication was probably covered. > > > Pippin Tim Now: I suspect that if Pettigrew had one then Remus certainly would. If Remus had one I would think Sirus would have mentioned it. If Pettigrew does have one, then there is the possiblity of him using it to spy, and Sirius would not have given Harry the mirror at all I think. Tim From jiggsvelasco at yahoo.com Thu Nov 4 13:14:07 2004 From: jiggsvelasco at yahoo.com (jp velasco) Date: Thu, 4 Nov 2004 05:14:07 -0800 (PST) Subject: Spinners End/Sirius In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041104131407.16002.qmail@web52906.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 117254 IMO Spinners End is a place where one of the members of the order lives... probably Lupin. Let us remember that Jo said that Harry's stay at the Dursleys will be the shortest yet and I think that Harry will go with Lupin when he leaves Privet Drive because a) he can't go to Grimwauld Place because Sirius is dead and Harry's not yet a member of the order, b) he can't go to The Burrow because it will somehow endanger the Weasleys (I remember somewher in OotP that The Burrow was rejected as a headquaters.) So it's logical that the next guardian of Harry will be Lupin since he was very close to his (Harry's) father and Sirius. Just a thought... I'm new here and I think this group is awesome and cool! Thanks for hearing me out! jp velasco From kelsey_dangelo at yahoo.com Thu Nov 4 17:40:10 2004 From: kelsey_dangelo at yahoo.com (Kelsey Dangelo) Date: Thu, 4 Nov 2004 09:40:10 -0800 (PST) Subject: Good moral core (Re: Dirty Harry/Clean Harry) In-Reply-To: <1099530684.89006.63520.m23@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <20041104174010.61253.qmail@web53103.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 117255 Del replies : <>> Kelsey: Very good point! I wonder though about the place of consequences or end results in moral choices. I think that we wonder if Harry did the right thing (particularly at the end of OOP) because he failed (and because Sirius was killed). If he had succeeded, we would probably think that he had done the right thing, sacrificing his safety for someones life and to protect the wizarding world. [I think that his friends decide to make the same moral choice by joining Harry.] Since its impossible to determine the outcome when faced with a moral choice, one must determine what "right" or "good" or "for the greater good" or "follows a moral code" at the time. Granted, this goes against the old adage, "The road to hell is paved with good intentions." I once heard this philosophical puzzle, where Hitlers grandmother is carrying the infant down the stairs. If she were falling, and a man next to her had the choice to save the baby or not to, which would be the right moral decision? If the man let the baby fall, he would be saving the lives of millions of people, but, at the time he could never know that. He would be letting a baby die. Then theres the question of lying to protect someone or save someones life. So doing the right thing at the time without thought of consequences isnt a cure all, either. Kelsey __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com From kelsey_dangelo at yahoo.com Thu Nov 4 17:42:21 2004 From: kelsey_dangelo at yahoo.com (Kelsey Dangelo) Date: Thu, 4 Nov 2004 09:42:21 -0800 (PST) Subject: Good moral core (Re: Dirty Harry/Clean Harry) In-Reply-To: <1099530684.89006.63520.m23@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <20041104174221.67681.qmail@web53104.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 117256 SSSusan wrote : " what I'm arguing is that the moral compass may, to some degree, just "be there." " Del replies : "In the realm of the Potterverse, this explanation would have a terrible consequence : if the moral compass can "just be there", then can it also "just not be there"? Is Tom Riddle bad like Harry is good : because they are just that way?" Kelsey: Yes. It can be there or not be there. Or it can be there, and someone can ignore it. I think that TR and HP are universally different because of who they are, what they have, and what they choose. There are other characters in the books that have different types of moral compasses, warped moral compasses, and ignore or obey them to different degrees. Kelsey __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com From Vivamus at TaprootTech.com Thu Nov 4 13:38:17 2004 From: Vivamus at TaprootTech.com (Vivamus) Date: Thu, 4 Nov 2004 08:38:17 -0500 Subject: Fudge and Umbridge (Was: Dementors in Little Whinging) In-Reply-To: <20041104071653.66740.qmail@web52609.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <200411040838775.SM01564@DEVBOX> No: HPFGUIDX 117257 Juli: > >I remember that during OoP when Sirius was > >talking to the Trio in the chimney, Ron suggested she > >could be a Death Eater, but he replied that just > >because she's mean she's not necessarily a DE. Feng Zengkun > I think it would weaken the series as a whole if Umbridge did > turn out to be a DE. I think that one of JKR's points is that > not all bad people are DEs, because even people working on > the 'good' side (in their opinion) can sanction dubious > actions that they believe is for the common good. Crouch, for > instance, in the first VW, allowing Aurors to kill suspected > DEs (there's a quote somewhere, I just can't remember it), > and sending people to prison without trials. As for the > ministry keeping records, I can totally see Fudge closing an > eye to Umbridge's actions if/when he found out. Vivamus: I happen to agree with Feng Z. that Umbridge was not a DE in OOP, for exactly that reason. It raises a more interesting question though: How is Fudge going to save his own career after such a monumental series of mistakes? I must disagree that Fudge might turn a blind eye to what Umbridge did. Umbridge committed several crimes, and talked openly about defying the Minister of Magic. She did not quite execute the Cruciatus Curse on a student, but was clearly intending to do so, and made the comment that what Fudge doesn't know won't hurt him (I know, she didn't actually do it, but in terms of embarrassing a politician, it doesn't matter.) She DID admit in front of a number of witnesses that she ordered Dementors to attack (and, I assume, deliver the Kiss to) Harry over the previous summer. That isn't just an abuse of power, it is a significant crime. While bureaucrats and politicians may find justifications for all sorts of abuses of power, I suspect they only support each other in the same when the abuses do not hurt themselves. Umbridge's actions were at best a serious embarrassment to Fudge, and he seems the consummate politician, does he not? The disaster that resulted from her leadership at Hogwarts cannot be rectified by the "success" of her DADA class. Fudge has created a PR disaster for himself in his trying to frame DD, and I would be astonished if he does not immediately cut his losses by dumping all association with Umbridge as quickly as possible. Let's see, what would provide the least damage for Fudge? Not sending her to Azkaban, that would result in too much attention. She *could* be sent to Azkaban for sure, but that also might make things worse for Fudge's position in the polls, rather than better. He certainly won't leave her in power. The most common way today to deal with embarrassments like her is to force them to retire immediately. They still keep their pension, which keeps them from making further trouble, and they are no longer a problem. If Fudge weren't in hot water himself, I'd say that is what he would do -- but it doesn't help *him*. I suspect she is going to be sacked, publicly humiliated, and lose her pension. That way, she becomes the scapegoat for Fudge's idiocy as well as her own. Fudge shows mercy by NOT sending her to Azkaban, but shows fortitude by otherwise being as nasty as possible. He rescues his own career by blaming all his own mistakes on her. The real question for me, though, is "what will she do then?" Personally, I think she will be recruited by V. She will have nothing to lose, and as former second in command of the MOM, she will know *all* the ins and outs of the MOM, so she will be an invaluable asset to V. She certainly has the right mind-set to become a DE. We don't actually know what is involved in becoming a DE, so IF she is recruited, we don't know if she will become a DE or something lower in V's hierarchy. Following up on Feng's argument, JKR could quite well do this, because the books are not just about showing us that not all bad people are DEs; they are about choices and consequences. Good people can do bad things by judgmental mistake or in the heat of the moment. The question is not whether they make mistakes, but what they do afterwards. By not turning back from mistakes, by taking pleasure in the harm one causes to others, there is a slippery slope that quickly leads to evil character. Are babies born evil? I don't think so. Did Tom Riddle just wake up one morning and decide, "I'm going to be the most evil wizard of all time"? It doesn't make sense that way, does it? We have so far only seen good characters and bad characters. Although we've seen a lot of ambiguous behavior (e.g., Snape), we haven't seen anyone truly crossing sides (with the possible exception of Percy, who hasn't crossed sides yet, but is certainly moving in that direction.) Evil people start out as good people who lack the moral courage to face their own bad choices. I think Umbridge COULD make the perfect counterpoint for Fudge, Percy and Snape. All four have done some pretty bad things, ostensibly (for all four) from good motives. I think we'll eventually see Percy repent all the way back to the good side (and possibly die for it,) and Snape and Fudge seem to be still in the balance. If Harry will be the instrument of Snape's eventual redemption, then Umbridge provides the example on the other side of the slippery slope. Her going all the way to evil provides the example of what Percy and Snape eventually will become, if they do not repent. Fudge could go either way, depending on the needs of the plot. What am I saying? ANY of them could go either way, depending on the needs of the plot. Vivamus From foad at bway.net Thu Nov 4 19:43:40 2004 From: foad at bway.net (ab35ppw) Date: Thu, 04 Nov 2004 19:43:40 -0000 Subject: Dobby house elf for Potters? (Was Re: Why were Harry's parents so rich?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117258 finwitch wrote: > BTW, if they were *rich*, did they have any house-elves? And if they did have, where are they now? I have often wondered if Dobby was the Potter's house elf and if that was why he was able to help Harry and knew where to find Harry even though Privet drive has protections around it. ab35ppw From kelsey_dangelo at yahoo.com Thu Nov 4 21:27:28 2004 From: kelsey_dangelo at yahoo.com (Kelsey Dangelo) Date: Thu, 4 Nov 2004 13:27:28 -0800 (PST) Subject: Was Harry designed as the Anti-LV weapon? In-Reply-To: <1099558059.15516.90437.m5@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <20041104212728.34733.qmail@web53103.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 117259 Robert A. Rosenberg wrote: I read a story once that had this twist ending. The so called Villain was just trying to keep civilization running until it was time for the Prophesy to occur and he could turn the job over to the person who was destined to "defeat" him. Kelsey: Yes, there is a Xena episode where this happens (a King adopts the baby that would take over as his son) as well as a Greek tale (Perseus, I believe), where the hero accidentally kills his grandfather at an Olympic game when his grandfather had tried to kill him because the oracle said that Perseus would kill his grandfather. I hope/believe that Harrys prophesy will be another twist solution (like the "servant of Voldemort" one). Maybe that Harry destroys Voldemort inadvertently rather than through straight-out murder. He might destroy Voldemort, but not Tom Riddle (although that sounds a little too Star Wars-y). Kelsey From patnkatng at cox.net Fri Nov 5 02:10:59 2004 From: patnkatng at cox.net (Katrina) Date: Fri, 05 Nov 2004 02:10:59 -0000 Subject: The only one he ever feared? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117262 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Eustace_Scrubb" wrote: > > Chancie wrote: > > A thought came to me as I was reading some other posts, and > > at the risk of sounding very stupid I figured I'd go ahead and > > throw this on out there. > > > > Why is DD the only wizard Voldemort feared? > > Eustace_Scrubb: > Great question, don't worry... > > In addition to what others have said: > > 1) Voldemort believes Dumbledore has been "onto him" at least since > Tom Riddle's fifth year at Hogwarts. Dumbledore is one of the few > people who know that Tom Riddle transformed himself into Voldemort. > Voldemort probably either knows or suspects that Dumbledore knows more > about Tom Riddle's history than anyone else (maybe even more than > Voldemort knows himself). > 2) Dumbledore defeated Voldemort's "predecessor," Grindelwald. > 3) Voldemort knows that Dumbledore knows more about Harry (via the > prophecy) than Voldemort does. > 4) Voldemort believes that Harry is the one with power to vanquish the > Dark Lord--even if he still doesn't know the whole prophecy--and he > probably believes that Harry can only develop his powers fully under > Dumbledore's guidance. > > My 4 cents, > > Cheers, > > Eustace_Scrubb > "Not useless," said the Owl. "Eustace!" Katrina: I think that's exactly it. What LV fears about DD is what he knows. I've heard it postulated that when TR dropped "off the radar screen" after he finished at Hogwarts, it was because of the triple AK murder in Little Hangleton. The ministry had to know about this: talk about a violation of the Statute of Secrecy! And since the victims were named "Riddle," someone had to have been able to put 2+2 together. I doubt if anyone knows as much about LV's past as DD. I'd even go so far as to say that the reason DD called him "Tom" in the MoM was to remind him of that fact. Something else to ponder, anyway. From ginnysthe1 at yahoo.com Fri Nov 5 02:49:45 2004 From: ginnysthe1 at yahoo.com (ginnysthe1) Date: Fri, 05 Nov 2004 02:49:45 -0000 Subject: The only one he ever feared? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117263 Katrina wrote: > What LV fears about DD is what he knows. I've heard it postulated that when TR dropped "off the radar screen" after he finished at Hogwarts, it was because of the triple AK murder in Little Hangleton. The ministry had to know about this: talk about a violation of the Statute of Secrecy! And since the victims were named "Riddle," someone had to have been able to put 2+2 together.< > I doubt if anyone knows as much about LV's past as DD. I'd even go so far as to say that the reason DD called him "Tom" in the MoM was to remind him of that fact. Something else to ponder, anyway.< Kim here, even more intrigued now with this discussion: Without realizing it, Katrina has given me another excuse to go back and re-read parts of OotP (my favorite of the series). I had no recollection of DD calling LV "Tom" during the MoM battle in OotP. That DD is a sly one, isn't he. It also hadn't occurred to me that the MoM would have been on the look-out for the murderer of the 3 "Muggle" Riddles. Tom Jr. was spotted in the vicinity, wasn't he, but was unknown to the Muggles in the area, though you're right -- not to the "all-seeing eye" of the MoM. The MoM would have known that AKs had been used even if the cause of the deaths had stumped the Muggle police. So Tom hit the road as a fugitive from justice. Keep these thoughts flowing, folks! Cheers, Kim From dk59us at yahoo.com Fri Nov 5 03:22:44 2004 From: dk59us at yahoo.com (Eustace_Scrubb) Date: Fri, 05 Nov 2004 03:22:44 -0000 Subject: The only one he ever feared? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117264 Kim wrote: > > And doesn't OotP show that only the ones > > about whom the prophecy is written can open the prophecy sphere? > > So maybe TR went to the Ministry years before, found the "Dark > > Lord" sphere and opened it? > > > > Kim khinterberg added: > > If there was a prophecy about the coming of Voldemort and he himself > found out about it, how would Dumbledore find out about it? Did he > witness it? Did someone tell him? Or was his name involved as > well, so he could pick it up and touch it? Eustace_Scrubb now: The rise of Voldemort may well have been prophesied, and perhaps Dumbledore heard it. But if Tom Riddle already knew about the prophecy room at the MoM and had removed this prophecy from the shelf himself, he wouldn't have needed to spend months during OoP figuring out how to remove a prophecy, would he? First he tried to have a third party snatch it (was that Broderick Bode under an Imperius curse?), then Rookwood eventually told him that only those mentioned in the prophecy could do it. Cheers, Eustace_Scrubb From snow15145 at yahoo.com Fri Nov 5 03:28:33 2004 From: snow15145 at yahoo.com (snow15145) Date: Fri, 05 Nov 2004 03:28:33 -0000 Subject: Family ties. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117265 Kneasy: But there's a bit you missed out: "Voldemort put a bit of himself in me?" Harry said, thunderstruck. "It certainly seems so." That, combined with listing the qualities prized by Slytherin with no indication that these weren't also passed across at the same time. Powers are different. There's only one we know of so far (Parseltongue) though DD does say that powers (plural) were transferred. Now others may disagree, but I reckon "...a bit of Voldemort.." is not the same thing as "Voldemort's powers." I think the former phrase was used very deliberately. Powers per se are not a problem, they can be used without hazard to the recipient (so long as he can control them). But a bit of Voldy is a different cauldron of toads; it implies much more than just being able to cast an unusual spell or two. IMO it's what allows the link, often at considerable distances, much further than shown between any other pair, between Harry and Voldy. The Dark Mark calls his disciples; but it doesn't affect their minds, only their arms. Voldy can stroll round Harry's mind because he has a foothold there already. Part of Harry's mind *is* part of Voldy. Snow: I couldn't agree more that part of Voldy himself has been neatly tucked away inside Harry only to become active through Voldy's emotional state. This is however, imo, not a two-way street. Voldy has never found the connection that does exist so that he could use that part of himself he had unintentionally left behind in Harry. Diary/Tom had come close to the understanding of what lies within Harry but missed severely when he remarks that there was nothing about Harry that was similar to himself when he met Harry in the chamber, Riddle determined that there was nothing special about him. Then again was Riddle an accomplished legilemence at this point, I doubt it he was only 16. Diary/Tom couldn't see the part of Voldemort that lies within Harry and Voldemort himself since has never connected to the fact that any part of him is missing, except for his immortality factor. Look at it this way, if Voldemort could access Harry's thoughts why would it be necessary to attempt to possess Harry at the Ministry? If Voldemort was already aware, via the connection factor, that he could access Harry's thoughts `inside' of Harry there would be little need to possess him physically. No I don't believe it has gone to that extent yet. Voldemort has never realized the available access to his Harry self. But it is questioning why Voldemort, when he was actually possessing Harry at the Ministry, did not see or rather feel his own presence in Harry. Snow From dontask2much at yahoo.com Fri Nov 5 03:48:40 2004 From: dontask2much at yahoo.com (charme) Date: Thu, 4 Nov 2004 22:48:40 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: The only one he ever feared? References: Message-ID: <000b01c4c2ea$57bac410$6601a8c0@MITRE.ORG> No: HPFGUIDX 117266 From: "Eustace_Scrubb" > Eustace_Scrubb now: > The rise of Voldemort may well have been prophesied, and perhaps > Dumbledore heard it. > > But if Tom Riddle already knew about the prophecy room at the MoM and > had removed this prophecy from the shelf himself, he wouldn't have > needed to spend months during OoP figuring out how to remove a > prophecy, would he? First he tried to have a third party snatch it > (was that Broderick Bode under an Imperius curse?), then Rookwood > eventually told him that only those mentioned in the prophecy could > do it. > charme: Reading this thread, I'm reminded of the prophecy orb which broke prior to Neville's dropping Harry's orb in OoP. I'm recalling from memory, but I believe what's written is fragmented and says something like "at the Solstice will come a new...." and "none will come after." If that's applied to the concept of Voldemort's rise or birth, part of it could mean he's the last heir of Slytherin, perhaps? The first part might refer to his birth? Maybe? Maybe not? charme From dk59us at yahoo.com Fri Nov 5 04:14:12 2004 From: dk59us at yahoo.com (Eustace_Scrubb) Date: Fri, 05 Nov 2004 04:14:12 -0000 Subject: The only one he ever feared? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117267 Becki wrote (in her sign-off): > > "Becki (who bets a bundle that there was a prophecy about Voldys > upcoming birth)" > Then Kim commented: > > You think you've read nearly all the clever ideas possible, and then > someone comes up with another one! > > It sure seems likely that a wizard of Dumbledore's wisdom, skill, > not to mention advanced age, would have somehow known that Voldemort > would be on the way eventually. Why not a prophecy about the Dark > Lord'sbirth, as Becki suggests? Trelawney's prophecy about Harry's > birth (and defeat of Voldemort) was only one of many on the shelves > in the Dept. of Mysteries, wasn't it? What's in all those other > prophecy balls (spheres?)? > Now Eustace_Scrubb: Well, of course there are a _lot_ fewer prophecy orbs than there were before the sextet and the Death Eaters had their little get-together. I wouldn't be surprised if there had been a prophecy foretelling the rise of Voldemort. And hasn't JKR said that we'd learn more about the circumstances of Tom Riddle's birth at some point (Book 6? Book 7?) It's always possible that we've _already_ heard part of this prophecy. Remember when Lucius Malfoy deflected Bellatrix' stupefy curse and it broke two of the orbs. Each released a wispy ghost-like figure which spoke their prophecies and dissolved, and little could be heard of them over the ruckus caused by the DEs. But this is what we do know: "...at the solstice will come a new...' said the figure of an old bearded man. "...and none will come after...' said the figure of a young woman. Now we have no idea how the orbs are/were filed: by seer's last name? subject's name? recipient's (i.e., whoever _heard_ the prophecy)? Chronological order? The ones destroyed were about a foot to the left of Harry and it appears the students were still right where they had found the Dark Lord/?Harry Potter orb. Perhaps there had been a number of Dark Lord-related prophecies. All filed under "Dark Lord"? Maybe _all_ evil overlords in the WW are called "Dark Lord" until they're defeated? But let's just say it's possible one or both of those smashed prophecies applied to Voldemort. I've always read those fragments as illustrations of how the orbs worked, so that we'd understand later that when Neville dropped the DL/?HP orb and it smashed, the record of the prophecy was gone for good. Maybe in true JKR fashion, they're more than that. (Then again there was that Mark Evans thing a while back that had me thinking...) Cheers, Eustace_Scrubb From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Fri Nov 5 04:15:52 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Fri, 05 Nov 2004 04:15:52 -0000 Subject: Occlumency: Relax or resist? (Was: CHAPTER DISCUSSION: Chapter 29, Career Advice In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117268 Carol earlier: > > The problem with your analogy is that Occlumency, like resisting an Imperius Curse, requires being on your guard and fighting off the > > enemy's attempts to penetrate your mind. Relaxing would be > disastrous and could even be fatal. Snape is trying to demonstrate to Harry what he would be up against if LV tried to invade his mind and the only way to do that is to impersonate Voldemort. Basically Snape tells Harry what he needs to do--whatever it was that he instinctively did to fend off the invasion by Crouch!Moody. But Harry isn't listening. > > Alla responded: > > I believe what Nora was trying to say and she an correct me if I am > wrong is that we DON'T KNOW the true nature of Occlumency yet. It > is reasonable to assume that without achieving relaxation first it > is impossible to learn how to fight off Voldemort. > > We don't know that relaxation could be fatal, ont he contrary, it > seems that it is quite useful and necessary. Since Snape > continuously tells Harry to clear his mind. it looks like relaxation > to me. > > But how can Harry relax with such deep level of mistrust achieved > over the years he feels towards Snape? Carol again: I think we know a great deal about how Occlumency works, and we can see when and why Harry fails or gets it right. Before the first lesson, Snape tells him what he needs to do--*not* relax but to *resist*--to protect his mind from intrusion as he did with the Imperius Curse (534). Had Harry relaxed under the Imperius Curse, he would have jumped over the desk as ordered. Snape tells Harry to use his wand or any other means he can think of to defend himself because he's about to break into Harry's mind. He then advises Harry to "*brace yourself*"--the exact opposite of relaxation (OoP Am. ed. 534). He strikes with a Legilimens spell before Harry has had time to "summon any force of resistance" (534). Then, when the memory of Cho is about to appear, Harry hears a voice in his head (exactly as he did when resisting the Imperius Curse) and he fights back. If he had been foolish enough to *relax,* Snape would have seen him kissing Cho. And Snape, rather than reacting angrily, coolly asks whether Harry meant to hit him with a stinging hex. He tells Harry, in essence, that he should have used the hex sooner, and deliberately: "You let me get in too far. You lost control" (535). Snape tells him to clear his mind--not the same as relaxing because it requires effort and "discipline" to "focus" (Snape's words, 535). He needs to "stop wasting time and energy shouting": "Repel me with your brain and you will not need to resort to your wand" (535). Harry, however, continues to allow his anger at Snape to "pound through his veins like venom" and consequently he sees some of his most powerful memories--a dragon, his parents in the mirror, Cedric's body. Rather than resisting Snape, he falls on his knees crying "NOOOOO!" Snape reacts furiously to this failure: "You are not trying, you are making no effort, you are allowing me access to memories, you are handing me weapons!" 536). He wants Harry to forcibly resist him, to fight him back using any means available rather than give in and allow him access to such highly emotional moments. Snape knows what Voldemort could do with that knowledge and that it must be kept from Voldemort at all costs. And the only way to do that is to resist Voldemort's intrusion, to block Voldemort's access to his memories and emotions by forcibly closing his own mind. Two months later, after a series of lessons that we are not privileged to witness, Harry manages to "screw. . . up his face in concentration" as the memory of Dementors swarms about him. As the result of this effort, he sees Snape's face through the memory of Dementors and deliberately calls out "Protego!" Even though he's using his wand rather than his "brain," he's finally doing what Snape wants--fighting back--and in consequence, he sees Snape's childhood memories instead of his own (592). And Snape, white-faced after having been knocked backwards and having his wand fly out of his hand, actually says rather calmly, "That was certainly an improvement. I don't remember telling you to use a Shield Charm, but there was no doubt that it was effective" (593). Snape only grows angry when a memory of the dream appears and instead of fighting to protect it, Harry allows the dream to continue, running in the dream through an open door in the Department of Mysteries, at which point Snape shouts, "Explain yourself!" And when Harry admits that he's never seen the door open in his dream before, Snape shouts, "You are not working hard enough!"(593). He knows that Harry has wants to see what's inside the door. He hasn't been *working* to clear his mind and prevent the dream from coming. Granted, Snape wants Harry to "rid [his] mind of all emotion" before he sleeps, to "make it blank and calm" (538), but he is not telling him to relax. He is telling him to "master yourself, control your anger, discipline your mind!" (536). The state of mind he is looking for requires *effort.* What he doesn't want is for Harry to relax because if he does, the dream will come (as it does in several instances, but it's always interrupted). But my point is that, especially when Harry is facing Snape, who is acting the part of Voldemort by forcibly invading Harry's mind, relaxation is the last thing Harry should be doing. Snape is right to make him resist the intrusion and fight back. He wants him to progress to the point where he can do it of his own accord, with his mind rather than his wand. He wants him to be wary, to be alert, to be prepared--as Snape himself must be when he confronts Voldemort. He does not want Harry to give in or submit to his attack, or to yield to the temptation of finishing his dream. If Harry were really in Voldemort's presence, eye to eye with him, to relax would be to allow Voldemort to enter his mind and see private memories like those that were revealed to Snape. To relax in sleep, to allow that dream, is also to allow Voldemort to enter his mind. Snape is teaching Occlumency in the only way it can be taught, as far as I can see. Just as the only way to learn to resist the Imperius Curse is to be subjected to it, the only way to learn Occlumency is to be subjected to Legilimency. And the only way to resist Legilimency is to be on your guard, focused, disciplined, and determined. Relax and you are at the mercy of the Legilimens. Carol, hoping that the canon citations are sufficient to support and validate her point From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Fri Nov 5 04:54:37 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Fri, 05 Nov 2004 04:54:37 -0000 Subject: Is Harry a Metamorphmagus? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117269 Finwitch wrote: > > > Anyway, a *strong* Metamorhmagus could, ultimately, take on forms of > animals. It's only a matter of degree, I think. Carol responds: I don't think we've seen enough metamorphmagic to know what it is yet. Tonks can change the shape of her nose and the color and style of her hair at will, and she has appeared as two different older women, neither corresponding to any known person. We don't know whether she could change her height and weight to appear as, say, Delores Umbridge, or whether she could appear to be male, whether as a known person, say, Lucius Malfoy, or as some imaginary man or boy. We've seen no indication at all that she can turn into an animal (or, as Hannah Abbott thinks Sirius can do, change into a potted plant!). I'm quite sure we'll see more of Tonks, but I doubt that we'll see a second metamorphmagus (certainly not Harry, who has more pressing concerns), but my impression is that the ability is somewhat more limited than you suggest. I could, of course, be 100 percent wrong! Carol From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Fri Nov 5 05:14:21 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Fri, 05 Nov 2004 05:14:21 -0000 Subject: Is Harry a Metamorphmagus? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117270 Kim wrote: > What I read in that passage is that Peter had had the wand > in hand for just long enough to start the process of "rat > transformation" before Harry's "Expelliarmus!" knocked the wand out > of his hand. I realize it doesn't say that explicitly, but I also > don't think there would have been a bang and burst of light for a > self-transfiguration spell anyway, so that part is naturally missing > from what's written. And the "Too late" implies (to me anyway) that > Harry had been too late in expelling Lupin's wand away from Peter and > so Peter'd been able to transform himself back into Scabbers right > before. Carol responds: What about Sirius, who certainly didn't have a wand when he transformed himself into a dog to escape Azkaban, and still didn't have one as late as the Shrieking Shack scene? (He used Snape's wand to threaten Pettigrew, and earlier intended to kill him with a twelve-inch knife.) Carol, with apologies for the short post From seriouslyserious2004 at yahoo.com Thu Nov 4 17:59:31 2004 From: seriouslyserious2004 at yahoo.com (seriouslyserious2004) Date: Thu, 04 Nov 2004 17:59:31 -0000 Subject: An Awful Thought In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117271 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "ladyramkin2000" wrote: > Now the awful thought that struck me was: If (God forbid) Jo was run > over by a bus tomorrow, would we be in the same position as the > Droodists, endlessly theorizing but never able to reach a > satisfactory conclusion. I cant bear to think about it. I guess they would hire someone to finish the series for her. It is worth a lot of money, and a lot of people have a vested interest in seeing it completed. Now that we're all the way through book 5 and there are only two more books to go, it probably wouldn't be that hard to do. SS From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Fri Nov 5 06:24:57 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Fri, 05 Nov 2004 06:24:57 -0000 Subject: forms of address In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117272 Carol: > > Do any Brits on the list, preferably male, recognize a schoolboy > > pattern carried into adulthood here, for the adult male > > characters--and for McGonagall? > > > > Carol, with apologies for repeating previously expressed ideas but > I'm still looking for responses from people with a British schoolboy > > background > > Geoff: > Please, Miss, I fall into the above requested category! > > :-) > > To save me reposting what I have said before, may I just say that I > think I covered a lot of this is messages 115863 and 116253 which I > hopes had clarified the position. My dear Geoff, (Is it proper for a woman to say that? Compare DD's "my dear Professor" to McGonagall. If not, please accept my apologies.) I did read your posts carefully, but I don't see my questions answered. I'm specifically comparing McGonagall to the nineteenth-century English schoolboys in the biographies and literature I cited earlier (Percy Shelley is a real-life example, David Copperfield a literary one) who called their close male friends by their last names both during their schooldays and in their later lives. Are you familiar with this pattern, in literature, at least? Does McGonagall seem to be following it, at least in PS chapter one? (I did read what you wrote about office relationships, etc. That's interesting, but it's the "schoolboy pattern carried into adulthood" that I'm asking about--not nicknames like those you mentioned, but last names for close friends.) Also, regarding Snape calling Lupin Lupin and Lupin calling Snape Severus: What's up with that? Is Snape distancing Lupin or just using the name he used in their schooldays? Is Lupin being polite or overly friendly or something else? I think you said that last names weren't appropriate between colleagues, but if that's what they used in their schoolboy days, why not? Please, sir, I did read your posts, sir, but I just feel that my particular questions weren't addressed. Carol, who has definitely read too much nineteenth-century literature and not enough modern stuff From kb1195 at hotmail.com Fri Nov 5 01:26:14 2004 From: kb1195 at hotmail.com (katevldz) Date: Fri, 05 Nov 2004 01:26:14 -0000 Subject: Did the Potters know the prophecy? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117273 In the middle of reading PoA (again), I began to wonder, did Lily and James know about the prophecy? Did DD ever tell them exactly what Trelawney said that night? Two passages made me wonder: PoA US Chp 10, 204-205 "Fudge dropped his voice and proceeded in a sort of low rumble. 'Not many people are aware that the Potters knew You-Know-Who was after them. Dumbledore, who was of course working tirelessly against You-Know-Who, had a number of useful spies. *One of them* tipped him off, and *he alerted James and Lily at once*. He advised them to go into hiding.'" So, a spy for the Order tipped off DD telling him Lily and James were in danger, but didn't he already know they were in danger (either them or the Longbottoms, or both) because he heard the prophecy about a baby born to parents who defied Voldemore thrice. Did he tell them the contents of the prophecy or just let them believe Voldie was after them because they had defied him three times. Shouldn't they have gone into hiding well before now, if DD had told them the contents of the prophecy? Maybe DD didn't tell anyone about the contents of the prophecy. Did he think Trelawney was nuts at first? PoA US Chp 12, 240 White fog obscured his [Harry] 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... This scene suggests to me that James is concerned for his wife and son, as anyone would be in that situation. He's telling them to run - he wants to save both of them. If they knew that Voldie was after Harry, perhaps they would have both stood up to Voldie at the same time and Lily would have never sacrificed for Harry in the way that she did? Did they know Voldie was explicitly after Harry, not just after them? In OotP, Dumbledore tells Harry (Chp 37, 840) that he went to see a Divination applicant on a cold, wet night, sixteen years ago, and that's when Trelawney prophesied. To me, a cold, wet night indicates winter, or early spring. This would had to have been before Harry was born, Lily already pregnant. But the Potters don't go into hiding until Harry is around 1 year old. I kind of just always assumed that James and Lily, and the Order for that matter, knew the contents of the prophecy because DD would have told them. Can anyone reference the canon as to if he did tell anyone? or is it just one of those things that we don't know, but will speculate about... Thoughts? kate, who's new here and been lurking way too long, finally coming out of the woodwork to post a thought From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Fri Nov 5 06:50:36 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Fri, 05 Nov 2004 06:50:36 -0000 Subject: Chapter 29, Career Advice - Broken Potion In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117274 Potioncat wrote: > This conversation is running on at least 3 subject lines...so it's > hard to decide where reply. On one, Carol has suggested we all agree > to disagree, which at this point is the best bet. We all seem to > have a problem letting go, although we've all pretty much agreed it > probably isn't important in the overall scheme of things. > > But, as my fingers are being pulled away...a few points. It's been > said it is obvious Snape broke it. Oddly enough, I never read it > that way. In fact it wasn't until it was brought up on this site a > long time ago that I even realized that was how most readers saw > it. And until I re-read it for the chapter discussion, I didn't > really dispute it. > > I still wonder why JKR wrote it like this because in the past where > it was Obviously!Snape (hexing broomstick) (refereeing to throw > game) (poisoning Lupin) it turned out to be something else happening > altogether. Carol: You're forgetting that the very first time we see Snape, there's exactly that same set-up: Obviously!Snape causing Harry's scar to hurt. I still say that Harry didn't see it and Hermione apparently didn't either, so we have no evidence whatever that Snape broke it, only the assumption that he did because it was "in character." Not even Harry makes that assumption--maybe because he's been wrong so often before? Yes, he gloated. Yes, he gave a zero that's essentially meaningless in an OWL year. Yes, it was petty. But let's not *assume* what cannot be proven one way or the other. Oh, erm, I was the one who said we should agree to disagree, wasn't I? Carol > From kgpopp at yahoo.com Fri Nov 5 02:15:19 2004 From: kgpopp at yahoo.com (kgpopp) Date: Fri, 05 Nov 2004 02:15:19 -0000 Subject: The only one he ever feared? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117275 > Kim replies: > > I think we may be on to something! From the prophecy about "the > > coming of the Dark Lord" or "Slytherin's heir" maybe DD wouldn't > > have known exactly who that Dark Lord would be, but he might have > > put two and two together when he saw what kind of student Tom Riddle > > really was. And the Dark Lord prophecy might have mentioned certain > > specifics, like a time when the Dark Lord would appear, etc., that > > would have pointed to Tom Riddle being the one. Kind of like the > > way Harry's prophecy didn't mention Harry's name, but did mention > > the circumstances of his birth. And doesn't OotP show that only > > the ones about whom the prophecy is written can open the prophecy > > sphere? So maybe TR went to the Ministry years before, found the > > "Dark Lord" sphere and opened it? Okay, I'm new to this so please understand I comment only because I find the conversation interesting, not to criticize. 1st) To the question about a connection between Lily & VD or her having some special power. I don't think VD thought Lily had any special power, or was jealous of or taken with Lily. I think that Lily was special in that she had a very deep love of her family. But VD did not see that in Lily, let alone understand the power of love or how far a parent might go to protect. In the 1st book DD explains to Harry that Lily's sacrifice left a mark of love and that mark protected Harry from VD. In COS, when Tom R. confronts Harry in the chamber, the Tom memory realized that there is old magic that he forgotten about and that is why the spell had not worked. 2) Going back 16 years when VD tries to kill Harry I think VD assumes that baby Harry would someday have or learn a great power and challenge him because he has not heard he whole prophecy. So VD figures he would kill Harry, before he learns to defend himself. As far as killing, why he didn't just kill Lily. His objective was to kill the competition. It's not so much that he minded killing Lily or wanted to spare her but rather that she was not the objective and he wanted to deal w/ Harry. I'd even go so far as to say the VD did not consider Lily a threat and might have wanted to see her suffer. (He seems the sicko type) Side note: Per DD, in OOP the lost prophecy, he interviewed Trewawney 16 years ago. Since Harry is in his 5th year in OOP, the prophecy was given about the time Harry was born. Since the prophecy was not known until about the time Harry was born, VD was already at the height of his power and I assume DD knew he was Tom. Reference: American non 1st ed. "The one w/ the power to vanquish the Dark Lord approaches. Born to those who have thrice defied him. Born as the 7th month dies and the dark lord will mark him as his equal, but he will have powers the Dark lord knows not. And either must die at the hand of the other for neither can live while the other survives." 3) Back to the power that Harry has that is un-known to the Dark Lord. DD explains to Harry that 2 kids were born in July whose parents had 3 times escaped VD. But when Harry suggests that he might not be the person in the prophecy and that it might be Neville (the other July Baby whose patents fought VD 3 times), DD points to the last part of the prophecy about marking him as an equal. I think this is both a literal and subtle clue. a) When VD tries to kill Harry he leaves the scar which is visual mark b) Going on just a bit more, DD thinks points out that VD considered Harry the son of a non-pure-blood to be the threat rather than the kid of the pure-bloods. This also ties back to COS when Harry notices the similarities b/w him and VD. Both sons of not "pure- blood" parents. When VD kills Lily and James he makes Harry an orphan just like him. So VD is most threatened by someone like him or an equal. I think when VD attacks him he is unconsciously recognizing or marking Harry as his equal. The question is does this mean equal in status or because of the accidental power transfer does it means Harry really is VD equal in terms of magical powers. Perhaps the power is different in Harry though, because Harry developed a different moral core that gives him an equally powerful but different kind strength. Thoughts? Kristen From kgpopp at yahoo.com Fri Nov 5 02:19:43 2004 From: kgpopp at yahoo.com (kgpopp) Date: Fri, 05 Nov 2004 02:19:43 -0000 Subject: The only one he ever feared? -- 1 more thing Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117276 Back to why VD does not fear Harry but does fear DD. Again I think when VD tried to kill Baby Harry, he had not heard the whole prophecy and thought how hard is it to kill a baby. In POS I think VD assumes that w/ the Elixir of life he will be immortal and assumes that 11 yr old Harry would not know how to kill and again because he is lead by his ego he make the same mistake of underestimating Harry. Or overestimating his own knowledge. In GOF, VD uses Harry's blood to get his body back and assumes now he can kill him again, and the protection is lifted. So again it seems that it would be better to kill Harry now when Harry knows so little and all the better in front of the Death Eaters to show his strength and supremacy. In OPP, I think VD is still in the same place. He fails to realize that he has marked this other non-pure blood as an equal and keeps thinking (and rightfully so) that is knows more than Harry and has better command of his powers than Harry. (Maybe at this point he is more powerful, hard to know what un-tapped potential lies in Harry.) In terms of Fearing DD, I think one of the reasons VD is in Slytherin because he looks out for himself. And so when he was in power he went after those he knew he could beat or control to build a power base. I think he was eventually going to go after DD but never head on. Why do that when you can set traps and or gang up on someone. I think VD feared DD because he knew DD had brains as well as powerful magic and he was the one person who'd be hard to trap and who he might not beat 1:1. Kristen From kgpopp at yahoo.com Fri Nov 5 05:00:40 2004 From: kgpopp at yahoo.com (kgpopp) Date: Fri, 05 Nov 2004 05:00:40 -0000 Subject: Family ties. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117277 > Kneasy: > Voldy can stroll round Harry's mind because he has a > foothold there already. Part of Harry's mind *is* part of Voldy. > > Snow: > Look at it this way, if Voldemort could access Harry's > thoughts why would it be necessary to attempt to possess Harry at > the Ministry? If Voldemort was already aware, via the connection > factor, that he could access Harry's thoughts `inside' of Harry > there would be little need to possess him physically. No I don't > believe it has gone to that extent yet. Voldemort has never realized > the available access to his Harry self. But it is questioning why > Voldemort, when he was actually possessing Harry at the Ministry, > did not see or rather feel his own presence in Harry. KP Wrote: I think VD knows there is a connection because he used a false image of Black being tortured to lure Harry to the MoM. As for if there is a bit of Harry in VD not sure if the curse caused one but now, he has some of Harry's Blood. (And DD seemed to be happy about that). Last, in OoP the exchange b/w VD and DD while VD possessed Harry seems to indicate that VD is making an attempt to trick DD into attacking Harry in hopes of harming VD. From jlnbtr at yahoo.com Fri Nov 5 00:44:17 2004 From: jlnbtr at yahoo.com (Juli) Date: Thu, 4 Nov 2004 16:44:17 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fudge and Umbridge (Was: Dementors in Little Whinging) In-Reply-To: <200411040838775.SM01564@DEVBOX> Message-ID: <20041105004417.70308.qmail@web53102.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 117278 --- Vivamus wrote: > How is Fudge going to save his own career after such a > monumental series of mistakes? Fudge probably won't be able to save his career, we've heard from JKR that there'll be a new MoM, so we know Fudge will be out of the picture. The question is who's the new MoM? If it's someone on Dumbledore's side (which probably will), will they send Umbridge to Azkaban? Or will she just be fired from the MoM? Juli From jlnbtr at yahoo.com Thu Nov 4 23:35:58 2004 From: jlnbtr at yahoo.com (jlnbtr) Date: Thu, 04 Nov 2004 23:35:58 -0000 Subject: The only one he ever feared? / Lily's essence, eyes In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117279 > Juli was making a lot of sense when wrote: > As he knew Lily also had the power, that's why he was > reluctant to kill her, he may have known she was too much for > him, but because she sacrificed herself for Harry, he was able > to kill her but not Harry. > And caused Kim to ask another question: > Juli, are you saying, that in the act of her dying to save Harry, > that Lily passed on that power *completely* to Harry, and so LV was > then able to kill her, but Harry was now "immune" to LV like his > mother had been? Maybe Lily passed on part of her very essence to > Harry when she died, so as a result his eyes turned green like hers. > Maybe Harry'd have grown up blue- or brown-eyed otherwise? > Juli: I like what you're saying, lots and lots of people have mentioned that Harry's eyes are just like Lily's, everything else looks like his father, not his eyes. I don't know if we'll ever know if his eyes changed color AFTER Lily and James died. But that could be extremely interesting. Harry's born with brown eyes, and when his mother dies to save him, they instantly change into green color which indicates the "Power". Juli From spotthedungbeetle at hotmail.com Fri Nov 5 08:26:55 2004 From: spotthedungbeetle at hotmail.com (dungrollin) Date: Fri, 05 Nov 2004 08:26:55 -0000 Subject: Did the Potters know the prophecy? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117280 Kate wrote: In the middle of reading PoA (again), I began to wonder, did Lily and James know about the prophecy? So, a spy for the Order tipped off DD telling him Lily and James were in danger, but didn't he already know they were in danger (either them or the Longbottoms, or both) because he heard the prophecy about a baby born to parents who defied Voldemore thrice. To me, a cold, wet night indicates winter, or early spring. This would had to have been before Harry was born, Lily already pregnant. But the Potters don't go into hiding until Harry is around 1 year old. I kind of just always assumed that James and Lily, and the Order for that matter, knew the contents of the prophecy because DD would have told them. Can anyone reference the canon as to if he did tell anyone? or is it just one of those things that we don't know, but will speculate about... Dungrollin: Hello Kate. I've wondered about this too, though not for a while, and your reminder got me to thinking again... I suspect that DD kept that prophecy very firmly to himself. My reasoning is as follows: Wormtail and Sirius were trusted with being the secret-keeper, and knowing about the secret-keeper switch respectively. Sirius says in PoA (though whether he's entirely reliable is another question) that Wormtail had been passing info to Voldy for a year before the Potters died ? so we can be sure that Wormtail was not in on the prophecy, otherwise he'd have told Voldy ages ago, and OotP would have been about other things entirely. Right? It's possible that the Potters and Sirius and Lupin *did* know about it - but if they didn't suspect Peter, and didn't tell *him*, I think it's unlikely they'd have told Lupin and Sirius. However, if DD knew that Sirius knew the prophecy, then he would also have realised that Sirius was innocent of betraying the Potters. Voldy wouldn't have attacked the Potters knowing the full prophecy, and Sirius (if he were the spy) would have told Voldy all about it. So Sirius can't have known either. Lupin was the suspected spy, right? From what we know of the relationships between MWPP, I can't imagine James telling Lupin something while keeping it a secret from Sirius, can you? However, if Lily and James had known, but not told any of their friends (which I think would be out of character), then they would have realised *exactly* how important Harry was, and they would not have taken the secret-keeper gamble. The fate of the WW rested on keeping Harry safe. They would have accepted DD as secret-keeper. That's why I think they didn't know, and here's what I make of it (not much, and more questions). Not telling them was either another mistake of DD's ? or was a tactical necessity, unfortunate, but absolutely vital. Without quoting the prophecy at them, DD had no good reason to convince the Potters to accept him as secret keeper, and thus they died. Though if he *had* told them, I doubt they'd have kept the information to themselves, and Peter would have told Voldy immediately. Which is presumably why DD kept it to himself. Can anyone think of a really convincing reason why it's absolutely vital that Voldy doesn't find out what's in that prophecy? Something that would be worth risking the murder of James and Lily, and the attempted murder and marking of Harry? You could say that DD thought it was important for Harry to be marked by Voldy ? but he implies that if Voldy had known the prophecy he might have waited to see whether Harry or Neville turned into more of a threat, rather than attacking a baby. (Or rather, Harry asks that, and DD agrees with him in a roundabout way.) But surely keeping Harry alive was the priority? Allowing the attack at GH is a huge gamble ? you've got to be damn sure that it's going to pay off before you allow LV to AK (or `supposedly' AK) the only boy with the chance of getting rid of him for good. You've got to be damn sure that you've interpreted the prophecy right. I wouldn't have taken the risk. Unless... revealing the prophecy to Voldy was a far greater risk. DD says that Voldy wanted the prophecy as a weapon - to find out how to destroy Harry. It's always confused me, because the prophecy says no such thing. Why would Voldy think that it did? Why is it so important that Voldy doesn't know about the power that Harry's got in such quantities and that he has none of? And most intriguingly: how could the prophecy mean something *more* to Voldy than it means to us? Dungrollin From finwitch at yahoo.com Fri Nov 5 10:20:54 2004 From: finwitch at yahoo.com (finwitch) Date: Fri, 05 Nov 2004 10:20:54 -0000 Subject: Did the Potters know the prophecy? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117281 > Dungrollin: > Why is it so important that Voldy doesn't know about the power > that Harry's got in such quantities and that he has none of? And > most intriguingly: how could the prophecy mean something *more* to > Voldy than it means to us? Finwitch: The prophecy says 'power the Dark Lord knows not'. It doesn't say he doesn't HAVE it. He just doesn't know it. After all, since Voldemort took Harry's blood, he has all powers Harry does, but some of those he knows not. (A bit like Harry didn't know about being Parseltongue, until Hermione&Ron told him?) And um - Voldemort *doesn't* know. All he knows is that either Harry or Neville is the one with the power to defeat him. Now, as OOP&MOM take great deal of trouble he doesn't find out the whole prophecy- Voldemort *believes* it holds information about this 'power to defeat' him. If he's able to learn it, well... Of course, WE know it doesn't, but Voldy doesn't know that. (And that means you can *bluff* and say you have a power he doesn't know about - and Harry can *honestly* say so, because that's what the prophecy *says*.) I mean, Voldemort CAN tell if people lie (he IS a legilemens). Harry CAN tell him he knows the whole prophecy AND that he has a power DL knows not - BUT he can't tell him what that power is... Finwitch From spotthedungbeetle at hotmail.com Fri Nov 5 10:58:48 2004 From: spotthedungbeetle at hotmail.com (dungrollin) Date: Fri, 05 Nov 2004 10:58:48 -0000 Subject: Did the Potters know the prophecy? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117282 > Dungrollin: > Why is it so important that Voldy doesn't know about the power > that Harry's got in such quantities and that he has none of? And > most intriguingly: how could the prophecy mean something *more* to > Voldy than it means to us? Finwitch replied: The prophecy says 'power the Dark Lord knows not'. It doesn't say he doesn't HAVE it. He just doesn't know it. Dungrollin counters: DD says at the end of OotP `It is the power held within that room that you possess in such quantities and which Voldemort has not at all.' Finwitch again: After all, since Voldemort took Harry's blood, he has all powers Harry does, but some of those he knows not. Dungrollin counters: That's pure and unadulterated speculation. All we know for sure, is that because Voldy used Harry's blood as the `blood of an enemy' that Voldy can now touch Harry (Graveyard, GoF), where Quirrell!Mort couldn't. Nothing about transfer of *powers*. Finwitch again: And um - Voldemort *doesn't* know. All he knows is that either Harry or Neville is the one with the power to defeat him. Now, as OOP&MOM take great deal of trouble he doesn't find out the whole prophecy- Dungrollin counters: I'm afraid that's pure speculation again. We have absolutely no clue whether the Order and the MoM in general know the contents of the prophecy ? and frankly, would you trust Fudge not to tell Malfoy? I wouldn't. During OotP ? evidently the order knew there was a prophecy and it needed protecting. I don't think the ministry knew that Voldy was after a prophecy at this time, though. They wouldn't have believed DD if he'd told them, it was just the Order that knew. If anyone other than DD and Harry know the prophecy in its entirety, then I reckon Voldy would know. If Moody had known, then Barty Crouch would have found out. If Pettigrew had known, then Voldy would know. As Voldy clearly doesn't know, I suggest that nobody ? not even Lily and James, was taken into DD's confidence about the contents of the prophecy before GH. Finwitch: Voldemort *believes* it holds information about this 'power to defeat' him. If he's able to learn it, well... Of course, WE know it doesn't, but Voldy doesn't know that. Dungrollin counters: But *why* does Voldy believe that the prophecy will tell him how to kill Harry? And *why* does DD think it so important that he doesn't find out? From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com Fri Nov 5 11:39:32 2004 From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (arrowsmithbt) Date: Fri, 05 Nov 2004 11:39:32 -0000 Subject: Family ties. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117283 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "snow15145" wrote: > Then again was Riddle an accomplished legilemence at this point, I > doubt it he was only 16. Diary/Tom couldn't see the part of Voldemort > that lies within Harry and Voldemort himself since has never > connected to the fact that any part of him is missing, except for his > immortality factor. > Look at it this way, if Voldemort could access Harry's thoughts why > would it be necessary to attempt to possess Harry at the Ministry? If > Voldemort was already aware, via the connection factor, that he could > access Harry's thoughts `inside' of Harry there would be little need > to possess him physically. No I don't believe it has gone to that > extent yet. Voldemort has never realized the available access to his > Harry self. But it is questioning why Voldemort, when he was actually > possessing Harry at the Ministry, did not see or rather feel his own > presence in Harry. > I read the possession at the Ministry as a ploy, a last gasp effort that would persuade DD to zap Harry in the hopes of nailing Voldy or forcing him out of Harry. Possession is a bit different to Legilimancy, the effects on Harry were markedly different. Now; one interesting speculation that arises from your last sentence. This is the first time (since Godric's Hollow if you go along with the possession theories, or ever if you don't) that we know that Voldy has possessed Harry. What if - when he withdrew the fragment of himself inside Harry was re-united with the rest of the Voldy mind. No evidence either way yet, and the first hint in the next book would be if Harry's scar starts playing up again. If it does then Voldy's still in there. But if it doesn't then he isn't. Two consequences that I can see if the Voldy bit has gone: 1. Harry will no longer get a warning that Voldy is up to something. 2. A re-united Voldy might well be a stronger Voldy. Could happen, but unlikely IMO. Too soon. Book 7 maybe - as lead-up to the final resolution. Kneasy From bob.oliver at cox.net Fri Nov 5 12:16:06 2004 From: bob.oliver at cox.net (lupinlore) Date: Fri, 05 Nov 2004 12:16:06 -0000 Subject: Occlumency: Relax or resist? (Was: CHAPTER DISCUSSION: Chapter 29, Career Advice In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117284 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" wrote: > > > Carol, hoping that the canon citations are sufficient to support and > validate her point No Carol, I'm afraid they are not. The canon citations you make are sufficient to show that, under Snape's tutelage, Harry finally managed *something*. That isn't, in and of itself, particularly impressive nor does it necessarily speak well of Snape's teaching methods. To use the martial arts analogy, it's true that if you train with a master who attacks you full out every day, you will eventually block one or two blows. That doesn't mean you've learned much and it doesn't mean that's a very good way of teaching. It's true that a true enemy in martial arts or Occlumency will attack full out. So what? Training does not have to be realistic in every phase in order to be effective. Else you would train in Army basic with live grenades. Training is much better accomplished by going slow, having patience, and making sure your pupil is relaxed and comfortable in every stage. Now, that doesn't mean they have to be relaxed and comfortable about the *attack*, which would lead to the results you describe. Rather they have to be relaxed and comfortable about the *methods and techniques,* which is a different proposition. An infantryman, for instance, in a firefight certainly doesn't want to be relaxed and comfortable about the enemy, it's true. He most certainly wants to be relaxed and comfortable (in the sense of feeling competent and not having anxiety) about his rifle and grenades. Sure he has to be vigilant about them, but one can only be truly vigilant about something one is comfortable with. Many meditation Masters take the same approach. It is true that clearing your mind requires effort. But that effort can only be obtained in the process of relaxation. One cannot focus if one is tense. Therefore you have to relax, let go of distractions, find calm, and concentrate effort. It is something of a paradox, but a well-known paradox. There is also another way of interpreting the references you have given, which is that Snape partially succeeds in spite of himself. I have no doubt that the methods Snape uses are those he thinks are effective. However, if ever there was a hypocrite it is him. Clear your mind of emotion? His mind is so choked and clogged by emotion that it has warped his entire life! Indeed, although Snape is a Master Occlumens, I wonder if he understands Occlumency very well. I suspect he is a natural at Occlumency, but not for the reasons he believes. Perhaps in the end Occlumency doesn't require clearing your mind, but martialing strong and violent emotion in its defense. Snape is so constantly in the grip of emotion that he fools himself into thinking that he is clearing his mind and mastering himself when in fact all he is doing is deploying his perpetual rage and bitterness as a shield. It would help explain the difference between Snape's instruction to *clear your mind* and Dumbledore's observation that Harry will be saved by his emotions. Lupinlore From willsonkmom at msn.com Fri Nov 5 12:59:13 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Fri, 05 Nov 2004 12:59:13 -0000 Subject: forms of address In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117285 >>>Carol wrote: I'm specifically comparing McGonagall to the nineteenth-century English schoolboys in the biographies and literature I cited earlier (Percy Shelley is a real-life example, David Copperfield a literary one) who called their close male friends by their last names both during their schooldays and in their later lives. Are you familiar with this pattern, in literature, at least? Does McGonagall seem to be following it, at least in PS chapter one? (I did read what you wrote about office relationships, etc. Potincat jumping in: I think I see your point now. JKR has put this wizarding school in the 20th century, but the wizards don't behave like 20th century people. In fact, they hold onto behaviors and tools from several different centuries. And JKR has mixed a 19th century form of address with a 20th century workplace. Because, if I'm correct, and I wouldn't bet on it, in 19th century literature, women did not work along side men as equals. So would it be correct to say that in the RW as schools opened to boys and girls, and men and women teachers, the use of last names went away. But in the WW it did not? Potioncat From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Fri Nov 5 13:28:18 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Fri, 05 Nov 2004 13:28:18 -0000 Subject: snape torturing Harry wasRe: Chapter 29, - Broken Potion In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117286 Alla: > I perfectly understand the liking of Snape as fictional character, > because no matter how much I want to strangle him, I definitely > think that Rowling did a very fine job creating him. > And I definitely don't want him out of the story, because then I > would have nobody to shout at. (I wish Voldemort would have been > just as good... Sigh.) > > When we start saying that what he is doing to kids is OK, because > he has many other good and more important qualities (and he > definitely has good qualities), then I want to argue. :) SSSusan: YES, YES, YES!! This is **exactly** how I feel about it. I refuse to be class as a Snape basher OR a Snape apologist, because I'm a combination of both. I like him because he's fascinating...and I **adore** him when he's RICKMAN!Snape ;-) ...but I do not EXCUSE his every action. I am much less inclined to issue a blanket "He's wrong!" statement than I used to be, but I will still criticize him when I see fit. And you have an excellent point about having no one to shout at if there were no Snape. Umbridge generated a few "Grrrr!"s from me, but if there were no Snape, who'd be left to yell at? DRACO? Please. At least not yet. Voldy? Only in an instance or two, such as the graveyard scene. LET'S KEEP SNAPE alive & kicking as long as possible, JKR! Siriusly Snapey Susan From mgrantwich at yahoo.com Fri Nov 5 13:49:06 2004 From: mgrantwich at yahoo.com (Magda Grantwich) Date: Fri, 5 Nov 2004 05:49:06 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Did the Potters know the prophecy? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041105134906.11880.qmail@web53101.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 117287 > I kind of just always assumed that James and Lily, and the Order > for that matter, knew the contents of the prophecy because DD would > have told them. > kate, who's new here and been lurking way too long, finally coming > out of the woodwork to post a thought Hello Kate. Personally I assume that James and Lily (and Frank and Alice Longbottom too) knew about the full contents of prophecy - that their children were the targets. It's possible that Sirius knew too, based on how close he was to James. The rest of the Order would have been told that Voldemort was after the Potters and the Longbottoms, no more details supplied. Magda __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Fri Nov 5 13:56:03 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Fri, 05 Nov 2004 13:56:03 -0000 Subject: The only one he ever feared? In-Reply-To: <000b01c4c2ea$57bac410$6601a8c0@MITRE.ORG> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117288 Eustace_Scrubb now: > > The rise of Voldemort may well have been prophesied, and perhaps > > Dumbledore heard it. charme: > Reading this thread, I'm reminded of the prophecy orb which broke > prior to Neville's dropping Harry's orb in OoP. I'm recalling from > memory, but I believe what's written is fragmented and says > something like "at the Solstice will come a new...." and "none will > come after." If that's applied to the concept of Voldemort's rise > or birth, part of it could mean he's the last heir of Slytherin, > perhaps? The first part might refer to his birth? Maybe? Maybe not? SSSusan: You've got the quote correct, Charme, except for a "the"--"at *the* solstice"--which I don't think matters. I like the thought that this prophecy might concern the arrival of Voldy. If it does, then your suggestion that "and none will come after" means he's the LAST of Slytherin's line could fit. What if it meant he'd be the last of all Evil Wizard Overlords? Would JKR go that far? Imply that never again would there be somelike like Grindelwald or Voldemort in the WW? How would we feel about it if she did? Would it "excuse" DD's puppeteering and grand planning if he knew this? It seems unlikely to me that killing Voldy would somehow lead to a Forever of no evil wizards. That is, unless in defeating Voldy all magic is somehow destroyed? Hasn't that possibility been proposed here before? Siriusly Snapey Susan From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Fri Nov 5 14:03:00 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Fri, 05 Nov 2004 14:03:00 -0000 Subject: An Awful Thought In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117290 ladyramkin wrote: > > Now the awful thought that struck me was: If (God forbid) Jo was > > run over by a bus tomorrow, would we be in the same position as > > the Droodists, endlessly theorizing but never able to reach a > > satisfactory conclusion. I cant bear to think about it. Seriously Serious: > I guess they would hire someone to finish the series for her. It is > worth a lot of money, and a lot of people have a vested interest in > seeing it completed. > > Now that we're all the way through book 5 and there are only two > more books to go, it probably wouldn't be that hard to do. Siriusly Snapey Susan: While I agree that we'd be better off than w/ the Dickens example, because the notes & final chapter exist, I take exception with the statement that it probably wouldn't be that hard to do. Think of the discussion these books generate here. All the "what if"s and "I wonder"s and "How is she going to"s that we discuss on & on & on. I think someone could package up the bare bones of what happens to Harry & Voldy and how it all ends, because it's probably there somewhere. But to tie up all the loose ends we want? To help us know at the end which were really red herrings and which were clever clues to be brought back in at a later point? I think it'd be incredibly difficult to do. Siriusly Snapey Susan From inkling108 at yahoo.com Fri Nov 5 14:27:24 2004 From: inkling108 at yahoo.com (inkling108) Date: Fri, 05 Nov 2004 14:27:24 -0000 Subject: Dobby house elf for Potters? (Was Re: Why were Harry's parents so rich?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117291 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "ab35ppw" wrote: > I have often wondered if Dobby was the Potter's house elf and if > that was why he was able to help Harry and knew where to find Harry > even though Privet drive has protections around it. Inkling now: This is an intriguing idea. It would also explain Dobby's intense love and devotion to Harry even before he met him. However -- Why wouldn't Dobby, who is after all now free of the Malfoys and all their constraints, simply tell Harry that he knew his family? How does an elf pass from one family to another, especially such very different and unrelated --well, who knows who's related to who, I'm sure we'll learn a great deal more on that score -- so let's say antagonistic families as the Potters and the Malfoys? Maybe you can use an elf to pay a gambling debt or some such thing. If there is a back story here, I bet it's a good one. Inkling From garybec101 at comcast.net Fri Nov 5 14:34:40 2004 From: garybec101 at comcast.net (garybec) Date: Fri, 05 Nov 2004 14:34:40 -0000 Subject: The only one he ever feared? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117292 Eustace_Scrubb now: The rise of Voldemort may well have been prophesied, and perhaps Dumbledore heard it. charme: Reading this thread, I'm reminded of the prophecy orb which broke prior to Neville's dropping Harry's orb in OoP. I'm recalling from memory, but I believe what's written is fragmented and says something like "at the Solstice will come a new...." and "none will come after." If that's applied to the concept of Voldemort's rise or birth, part of it could mean he's the last heir of Slytherin, perhaps? The first part might refer to his birth? Maybe? Maybe not? Becki; Two theoretical points I would like to suggest; First; If there is a prophecy about LV's upcoming birth, and/or rise to power, perhaps it was to Dumbledore that it was said to. That would make sense on how he would be aware of it without trying to break into the DoM. Second; If the broken prophecies/spheres that we heard fragments of; i.e.; at the Solstice...etc, were actually pertaining to the coming of the Dark Lord, would Jo be so bold as to put a Happy Birthday Voldy on her calendar for December 21st? Although it could be the Summer Solstice the end of June. Becki; (who is looking forward to others Birthday's and any significance they might have.) From foxmoth at qnet.com Fri Nov 5 14:34:36 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Fri, 05 Nov 2004 14:34:36 -0000 Subject: Chapter 29, Career Advice - Broken Potion In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117293 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Nora Renka" wrote: > > Breaking the potion doesn't seem to fit any nice plot-driven situation where any alternate reading would actually be deeply meaningful. It is rather serving a purpose of characterization, showing us what Snape does when he's angry. It could perhaps be read as having a slight plot implication; it's Yet Another Thing that helps ensure that none of the kids have enough trust or mind to remember to go for Snape. But it's really not a good analogy to the earlier instance, because of the plot/characterization divide. > > -Nora smacks herself for posting on a weeks-old thread Pippin: If it's so unimportant, why do we keep talking about it? I think it niggles because as a characterization note, it's out of place, just like "I made an entire cauldronful, if you need more." We don't need more confirmation of Snape's malice, just like we don't need more confirmation that he loves potion-making. And if we did, you would put it at the beginning of the scene not the middle or the end. There's gotta be something else going on. The street blows up and Sirius laughs, ergo Sirius did it. The potion bottle smashes on the floor and Snape gloats, therefore Harry thinks Snape is responsible. It's not that he is wrong, but that he could be. It foreshadows the faulty (IMO) reasoning by which Harry is going to conclude that Snape is responsible for Sirius's death, as well as, possibly, telling us we still need to be suspicious about those other explosions -- the one in Godric's Hollow and the one that caused the Muggle deaths. Pippin From foxmoth at qnet.com Fri Nov 5 14:40:11 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Fri, 05 Nov 2004 14:40:11 -0000 Subject: Did the Potters know the prophecy? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117294 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "katevldz" Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117295 > Pippin: > If it's so unimportant, why do we keep talking about it? I think > it niggles because as a characterization note, it's out of place, > just like "I made an entire cauldronful, if you need more." We > don't need more confirmation of Snape's malice, just like we > don't need more confirmation that he loves potion-making. And if > we did, you would put it at the beginning of the scene not the > middle or the end. There's gotta be something else going on. > > The street blows up and Sirius laughs, ergo Sirius did it. The > potion bottle smashes on the floor and Snape gloats, therefore > Harry thinks Snape is responsible. It's not that he is wrong, but > that he could be. It foreshadows the faulty (IMO) reasoning by > which Harry is going to conclude that Snape is responsible for > Sirius's death, as well as, possibly, telling us we still need to be > suspicious about those other explosions -- the one in Godric's > Hollow and the one that caused the Muggle deaths. > Potioncat: I know I should have snipped, but I couldn't determine where. I think you've hit on something here. This scene seems unimportant, but is it? You know, it was also obvious that Crookshanks ate Scabbers, but he didn't. You give the explosion as an example, that's a good one because it spans several books. While I doubt the broken flask will show up again, it could be part of Harry's continuing misjudgement of Snape. Of course if Snape wasn't such a jerk all the time, Harry wouldn't misjudge him so often. From willsonkmom at msn.com Fri Nov 5 15:02:19 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Fri, 05 Nov 2004 15:02:19 -0000 Subject: CHAPTER DISCUSSION: Chapter 30 (Grawp) In-Reply-To: <004901c4c165$2c90c7c0$1502a8c0@TOSHIBALAPTOP> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117296 Debbie wrote: > > Questions for Discussion > >>> 1. Why do you think Filch supports Umbridge so strongly? And why does Peeves support the opposite side? Potioncat: Isn't this surprising? I mean, I know he seems to dislike the students and he loves the idea of strict punishments, but this is a total betrayal of Dumbledore. Filch was trusted enough that he patrolled around the entrance to the Third Floor Corridor, and he was the one who helped Snape treat the dog bite. And that time it seems Pomfrey didn't even know about it. I found it very strange that he took Umbridge's side. I'm interested in seeing what his role will be in the next books. Peeves staying on DD's side does make sense. Partly because DD tolerates him and partly because making mayhem is what Peeves does best. > >>2. How do you react to Montague's failure to recover? Is it disconcerting, or just a bit of scatological/cartoon humor (it does involve a toilet, after all)? What about the contrasting attitudes of Ron and Hermione? Which view, if any, does JKR endorse? Why? Potioncat: I don't think we'll know until the other books come out. But she made a point of letting us know he wasn't getting better. It does seem funny at first glance, but it wouldn't have been funny if it had been one of the Gryffindors. And if you get down to it, it is worse than anything that happened to a Gryffindor at the hand of a Slytherin. It's also something that would be shocking if seen in a Pensieve by a child of Fred or George later on. (out of context to the greater story) I wonder if any of the teachers suspect anything? Too bad Snape cancelled Occlumency, he might have found out. > >>> 3. Why would Molly blame Ron for the Twins' departure? Do you think this is indicative of Molly's actual views, does it reflect Ron's own stress about his mother's expectations, or something else? Potioncat: I think it's Ron's stress. I don't remember in canon Molly ever blaming one child for "letting" another do something bad. It may be Ron's own feelings of if I'm a prefect I should have done something...sort of like Lupin feeling guilty for letting James and Sirius get away with things. From dk59us at yahoo.com Fri Nov 5 17:45:51 2004 From: dk59us at yahoo.com (Eustace_Scrubb) Date: Fri, 05 Nov 2004 17:45:51 -0000 Subject: The only one he ever feared? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117297 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "cubfanbudwoman" wrote: SSSusan: > I like the thought that this prophecy might concern the arrival of > Voldy. If it does, then your suggestion that "and none will come > after" means he's the LAST of Slytherin's line could fit. > > What if it meant he'd be the last of all Evil Wizard Overlords? > Would JKR go that far? Imply that never again would there be > somelike like Grindelwald or Voldemort in the WW? How would we feel > about it if she did? Would it "excuse" DD's puppeteering and grand > planning if he knew this? > > It seems unlikely to me that killing Voldy would somehow lead to a > Forever of no evil wizards. That is, unless in defeating Voldy all > magic is somehow destroyed? Hasn't that possibility been proposed > here before? Eustace_Scrubb: Let's keep in mind that the two fragments were from _different_ prophecies, so one, both or neither could relate to Voldemort. And as I pointed out in an excessively wordy post last night, we don't have any real idea how the orbs were filed. (As a museum curator, I would have recommended that the DoM _NOT_ store hundreds of valuable glass objects on open shelving, but that's beside the point now...) But either of the above interpretations are possible. We already know that TR/LV is the last descendant of Slytherin. And wouldn't the possibility that LV is the _last_ Dark Lord to arise raise the stakes nicely for those trying to defeat him? The defeat of Voldy=the end of Magic as we know it theory _has_ been proposed (Kneasy?). Someone who keeps track of post numbers (Geoff B.?) might remember when. But there's another interpretation: LV's looking for immortality, right? If he succeeds, maybe "none will come after" because he'll _always_ be there...at least as scary as the end-of-the-WW theory. Cheers, Eustace_Scrubb From manawydan at ntlworld.com Fri Nov 5 19:00:00 2004 From: manawydan at ntlworld.com (manawydan) Date: Fri, 5 Nov 2004 19:00:00 -0000 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Quills References: <1099613922.18403.32171.m8@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <002c01c4c369$a78f8640$704b6d51@f3b7j4> No: HPFGUIDX 117298 Steve wrote: >I can't imagine myself going to Hogwarts and stuggling away with >feather quills. At best, under normal use, a quill is only good for >about a week, and during that week requires frequent resharpening. >This frequent resharpening has given rise to the infamous 'pen-knife'. >So, back to Hogwarts, I can't imagine modern muggle kids putting up >with the tedious struggle of writing with quills; messy, slow, and >tedious. Personally I would have smuggled in a pen, and if the >teachers objected, perhaps they like the nice calligraphic writing >style of quills, I would have switched to a nice calligraphy tipped >fountain pen. That's if WW quills work in the same way as Muggle ones, of course. There may well be magic that keeps them sharp (Umbridge-style...) or ensures that they hold more ink than your standard bit of feather otherwise would. There may be exam regulations (the educational establishment being notorious for that kind of thing) which require the paper to be written with a quill. And it may even be that there is some magical work (Ancient Runes for example) that just wouldn't work if it was inscribed with a biro. Cheers Ffred (remembering a much-hated teacher who insisted that all of his class wrote with fountain pens - I've never written with one since!) O Benryn wleth hyd Luch Reon Cymru yn unfryd gerhyd Wrion Gwret dy Cymry yghymeiri From flamingstarchows at att.net Fri Nov 5 19:23:54 2004 From: flamingstarchows at att.net (texaschow) Date: Fri, 05 Nov 2004 19:23:54 -0000 Subject: Did the Potters know the prophecy? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117299 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "dungrollin" says: > DD says that Voldy wanted the prophecy as a weapon - to find out how > to destroy Harry. It's always confused me, because the prophecy > says no such thing. Why would Voldy think that it did? > Why is it so important that Voldy doesn't know about the power > that Harry's got in such quantities and that he has none of? And > most intriguingly: how could the prophecy mean something *more* to > Voldy than it means to us? ~Cathy~(out of lurking)here: I believe that Dumbledore is relating what Voldemort *believes* to be true, not the actual truth of the propecy. While we know what the prophecy says, Voldemort has never heard it in its entirety. He's assuming that their is some clue to defeating Harry in the part that he did not hear. All he knows for certain is that he tried to kill Harry as a baby, and it backfired badly. At this point, Harry has now defeated and/or escaped Voldemort as an infant, again at 11 years old when Voldemort cohabitated Quirell's body, again the following year as the memory of Tom Riddle in the Chamber of Secrets; and the biggest surprise of all - the escape from the graveyard when he was 14. As far as Voldemort is concerned, Harry should have been long dead by now. The only explanation to him is that there must be something important in the part of the prophecy that he does not know. The last thing that Voldemort wants is for Harry to grow up and become a fully trained and very powerful wizard that could meet him head-on. He wants to find a way to stop (kill) Harry by any means possible/necessary before that can happen. So, even though we know what the prophecy says (and still have a dozen ways of interpreting it), Voldemort is just desperate to find out before things get any more out of hand. From darkthirty at shaw.ca Fri Nov 5 19:30:10 2004 From: darkthirty at shaw.ca (Dan Feeney) Date: Fri, 05 Nov 2004 19:30:10 -0000 Subject: Chapter 29, Career Advice - Broken Potion In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117300 Nora: > But the two situations, in literary terms, are really not the same thing as they're not serving the same purpose. Pippin: > > If it's so unimportant, why do we keep talking about it.... We > > don't need more confirmation of Snape's malice, just like we > > don't need more confirmation that he loves potion-making. And if > > we did, you would put it at the beginning of the scene not the > > middle or the end. There's gotta be something else going on. Potioncat: > ...it was also obvious that Crookshanks ate Scabbers, but he didn't. > Of course if Snape wasn't such a jerk all the time, Harry wouldn't > misjudge him so often. Dan: Well, there are many times in the books where Snape delivers ghastly throwaway lines, like the infamous "I see no difference." Now, aside from the implication in this that Rowling is, well, perhaps compromising us, when we chuckle, cringe or whatever at that line, in preparation for some projected so-called "moral" judgement she may hand down, sometime (though I personally doubt she will let us off that easy, reducing the books to some little package), the line has no other possible point than, well, getting back at the Know-It-All. Unless... Well, unless Snape has some special characteristic of sight, something related to legilimency, say, that perhaps he sees only people's patronii, or sees them through their patronii, or something complicated and demanding on plot like that. Even then, however, the throwaway insults ask no analysis, only that we marvel, with perhaps bemused wonderment, at Professor Snape's sheer nastiness. What is different about the potion and the "whoops" is the implication for Harry's marks. But then, who's to say Snape didn't really have a chance to mark it anyway, before the accident? Maybe he's being mendacious about that! But what really strikes me in this scene, is how helpful Hermione was to Harry, when she had just told Ron to "takes notes for a change." She volunteered to vanish the rest of his potion. With friends like this, who needs enemies? Dan From bboyminn at yahoo.com Fri Nov 5 19:58:04 2004 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Fri, 05 Nov 2004 19:58:04 -0000 Subject: Did the Potters know the prophecy? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117301 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "katevldz" wrote: > > In the middle of reading PoA (again), I began to wonder, did Lily and > James know about the prophecy? Did DD ever tell them exactly what > Trelawney said that night? > > ...edited... > > Thoughts? > > kate, bboyminn: I think the first thing we need to do is make a distinction between knowing ABOUT the prophecy and literally KNOWING the Prophecy. Lots of people know about the Prophecy, but very very few have heard it quoted in it's entirety. Dumbledore is not one to give out information unnecessarily; he is very much a minimalist in that respect. So, I suspect most people got varying degrees of a summary of the Propehcy. First even if an infant has the power to vaquish the Dark Lord, what can the child do about it? He can't walk, he can't talk, he doesn't know any magic, hasn't had any training, so he's not really much of a threat. Dumbledore and any rational person would know this. If and when Harry was able to vanquish the Dark Lord, common sense would tell anyone who gave it a second thought, that that time would be in the distant future; most likely a couple decades away. In the mean time, would that lead Dumbledore to say well we'll just forget about the fact that people are being killed today and wait 20 years. I think not. While it's wonderful the /someday/ Harry will be able to do this, they need to solve the problem right now. Reasonably, Dumbledore would have hope to have defeated Voldemort long before Harry grew up and that task fell to him. Voldemort most likely had thoughts along the same line. He thought it better to vanquish his own potential opponent while that opponent was weak and helpless. Rule #38 - Evil Overlord's Handbook If an enemy I have just killed has a younger sibling or offspring anywhere, I will find them and have them killed immediately, instead of waiting for them to grow up harboring feelings of vengeance towards me in my old age. However, even given his desire to kill young Harry (and/or Neville) the threat wasn't immediate. Given Harry's age, Harry was unlikely to sneak out of his crib and come crawling after Voldemort. So, I have no concern that Voldemort waited a year and a half before attempting to kill Harry. Voldemort is afteral, a very busy man, he's trying to take over the world; that's very time consuming. Back to Dumbledore and the Potters (and probably, the Longbottoms), I'm sure the Prophecy was cause for concern, but not cause for any immediate action. I mean were Lily, James, and Harry suppose to go into hiding forever? I think not, we need to look at practical considerations. So, I suspect they cautiously went about their normal lives. However, at some point they weren't operating under the vague idea the Voldemort wouldn't like having a /vanquisher/ out there. At some point, they receive specific information via a spy that Voldemort had immediate plans to attack the Potters and probably the Longbottoms. Only under that imminent threat did the situation call for immediate action. At that time, the Potters and probably the Longbottoms went into hiding. Obviously, I don't see the Prophecy itself as a call to action for Dumbledore or the Potters. However, when news that an attack by Voldemort was imminent, certainly that called for action. To the original point, I think the number of people who have heard a direct quote of the Prophecy are extremely few. The number of those who have varying degrees of general and summary knowledge of the Prophecy is much larger. As to the Potters themselves, would Dumbledore have quoted it to them, or just explained it to them? Remember that realistically, Harry has no likelihood of fullfilling the Prophecy in next 15 to 20 years (from his birth), so I don't think Dumbledore saw any need to quote the Prophecy to them. That's just one man's opinion. Steve/bboyminn (was bboy_mn) From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com Fri Nov 5 20:46:54 2004 From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (arrowsmithbt) Date: Fri, 05 Nov 2004 20:46:54 -0000 Subject: The only one he ever feared? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117302 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Eustace_Scrubb" wrote: > > The defeat of Voldy=the end of Magic as we know it theory _has_ been > proposed (Kneasy?). Someone who keeps track of post numbers (Geoff > B.?) might remember when. > > But there's another interpretation: LV's looking for immortality, > right? If he succeeds, maybe "none will come after" because he'll > _always_ be there...at least as scary as the end-of-the-WW theory. > Yeah, I have mentioned that as a possible outcome a couple of times over the past year. Nobody seemed interested - mostly, I think, because they didn't want this fantasy to be killed off. The end of the WW, the death of JKR's wonderful playground? Horrors! How can this be?! Though as Jo has said she doesn't believe in magic and resolutely refuses to consider the possibility of sequels, well - it does give one food for thought. Similarly the possibility that Voldy isn't destroyed; though 'destruction' can take different forms, not all of them as comprehensive as others. His body will go, if only to save Bloomsbury's favourite author from being lynched, but it could be that his spirit remains - the antithesis of Hope from Pandora's Box - to wander the world fomenting trouble, strife and discord whenever he/it gets an opportunity. I agree that the two prophecy fragments could well be important to the story. It's part of my 'think laterally' approach. Voldy is after a prophecy which he thinks is very important. But we know that Sybill's burblings don't say anything which would justify this frantic activity - in fact it's fairly mundane stuff; forecasts a challenger, one will kill the other etc. So what? Do you think he hasn't figured that out already? He's supposed to be smart and he's run up against Harry often enough to see him as an obstacle that'll need to be disposed of - sooner rather than later if he wants a free run. But there are other Seers, other prophecies. Thousands of 'em judging by the Ministry storage. And it's probable that only a minority concern the running of the 3.30 at Epsom. They'll be about something a bit more important. In Harry's lifetime what's the most important thing? The Voldy Wars. The most important events for 100 years. I'd expect more than one prophecy to point the way. And if that's right then Voldy might have been after the wrong globe. A couple of posts in the past week have wondered if this whole farrago hasn't been a decoy ploy, protecting something much more important than Sybill's globe. At the beginning of OoP there's talk of a 'weapon'. So what is it and where is it? Some of us write about Weapon!Harry, but it wasn't Harry the Order was guarding, it was something in the Dept. of Mysteries. Why waste manpower on a grotty old globe that won't help Voldy in the slightest and can't even be taken off the shelf by anyone except Voldy or Harry? No reason to at all - unless someone wants to convince someone else that it's important. Of course, I've got a vested interest in this sort of thing; convoluted plotting, dirty work at the cross-roads, sneaky stuff. Plus wondering if it's the globe-like bubbles from Droobles Gum that Agnes is trying to bring to mind and communicate to Neville. Then there's the silvery orb that is Lupin's Boggart. Is it the moon? Or a globe? Ah! Paranoia can be so much fun! Kneasy From ginnysthe1 at yahoo.com Fri Nov 5 21:20:15 2004 From: ginnysthe1 at yahoo.com (ginnysthe1) Date: Fri, 05 Nov 2004 21:20:15 -0000 Subject: Is Harry a Metamorphmagus? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117303 Kim's partial post said: >What I read in that passage is that Peter had had the wand in hand for just long enough to start the process of "rat transformation" before Harry's "Expelliarmus!" knocked the wand out of his hand. I realize it doesn't say that explicitly, but I also don't think there would have been a bang and burst of light for a self-transfiguration spell anyway, so that part is naturally missing from what's written. And the "Too late" implies (to me anyway) that Harry had been too late in expelling Lupin's wand away from Peter and so Peter'd been able to transform himself back into Scabbers right before.< Carol responded: >What about Sirius, who certainly didn't have a wand when he transformed himself into a dog to escape Azkaban, and still didn't have one as late as the Shrieking Shack scene? (He used Snape's wand to threaten Pettigrew, and earlier intended to kill him with a twelve-inch knife.)< >Carol, with apologies for the short post< Kim now: No problem with your short post. Sometimes us long-winded types (that includes me!) need a break too ;-) (not that long-winded is bad -- it can be great, and very informative!) Anyhow, you are definitely right with your point about Sirius not having a wand and not needing it to transfigure hiimself. I'm pretty sure I saw my error about that back in a previous post or two (if you want to search back a week or so -- I think it was Imamommy who made similar points to what you've just made and I agreed with her -- sorry, I should have looked for those post nos. before starting typing, but if you want, look for the same thread and the list name Imamommy or my list name ginnysthe1). Kim (who sometimes forgets to look before she leaps) From ginnysthe1 at yahoo.com Fri Nov 5 21:47:20 2004 From: ginnysthe1 at yahoo.com (ginnysthe1) Date: Fri, 05 Nov 2004 21:47:20 -0000 Subject: Is Harry a Metamorphmagus? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117304 Hi Carol from Kim: Here's the specific post no. where I acknowledged my goof about the wand or no wand issue: 116739. Kim, who wonders if there'd be any takers for a contest for the *shortest* post... ;-) From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Fri Nov 5 21:51:44 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Fri, 05 Nov 2004 21:51:44 -0000 Subject: Etymology of "Death Eater" (was Re: With enemies like these.....) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117305 Alla earlier: > > > > Thanks for the link and yes, Graveyeard scene did strike me as being symbolic. So, does it mean that if Voldie and his followers eat> some part of "death" (which part I wonder?), did they expect to > become immortal? > Alla again: > > surely with JKR's love of names with meanings, the name of the > major evil in Potterverse bound to mean something,which should help > us uncover some key mysteries. > > So, I do consider it a possibility. Let's speculate a little > further. If "death eaters" indeed eat "death" in the real way, > whether Snape managed to put in the bottle or somebody else made > something "edible" or "drinkable" from death, Carol responds: Alla, I think you're on the right track and "eating death" does indeed relate to Snape's ability to "put a stopper in death" (i.e., bottled death that is not some mere poison that any wizard could make). There's probably a link here to Snape's role in the DES. (Of course, I also believe that he was brewing immortality potions for Voldy). The idea of Death Eaters eating bottled death strikes me as some sort of evil parody of the communion service in which Catholics, Episcopalians, and various other Christian denominations (Lutherans?) symbolically eat the body and blood of Christ to share in his resurrection. Are the DEs eating Voldemort's death or their own? You asked what part of death they eat. Maybe it's the middle part: death - d -th = eat. Okay, that was a very, very bad joke! What did you actually have in mind regarding "part of death"? Carol, hoping the pun wasn't in horrible taste and didn't offend anybody From gbannister10 at aol.com Fri Nov 5 22:08:05 2004 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Fri, 05 Nov 2004 22:08:05 -0000 Subject: An Awful Thought In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117306 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "cubfanbudwoman" wrote: > Siriusly Snapey Susan: > While I agree that we'd be better off than w/ the Dickens example, > because the notes & final chapter exist, I take exception with the > statement that it probably wouldn't be that hard to do. > > Think of the discussion these books generate here. All the "what > if"s and "I wonder"s and "How is she going to"s that we discuss on & > on & on. I think someone could package up the bare bones of what > happens to Harry & Voldy and how it all ends, because it's probably > there somewhere. But to tie up all the loose ends we want? To help > us know at the end which were really red herrings and which were > clever clues to be brought back in at a later point? I think it'd be > incredibly difficult to do. Geoff: Definitely. Look at the difficulty Christopher Tolkien had getting "The Silmarillion" ready for publication after JRRT's death and he had been working with his father on its preparation and, even then, it took 4 years. It wasn't published until 1977. Geoff http://www.aspectsofexmoor.com From tzakis1225 at netzero.com Fri Nov 5 22:17:26 2004 From: tzakis1225 at netzero.com (demetra1225) Date: Fri, 05 Nov 2004 22:17:26 -0000 Subject: CHAPTER DISCUSSION: Chapter 30 (Grawp) In-Reply-To: <004901c4c165$2c90c7c0$1502a8c0@TOSHIBALAPTOP> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117307 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "elfundeb" wrote: >2. How do you react to Montague's failure to recover? Is it disconcerting, or just a bit of scatological/cartoon humor (it does involve a toilet, after all)? What about the contrasting attitudes of Ron and Hermione? Which view, if any, does JKR endorse? Why? Demetra: The whole Montague vs twins episode reminds me of James/Sirius vs. Snape. The reason the twins give for shoving Montague into the vanishing drawer is that Montague tried to take points from them. The punishment seems a bit harsh as retaliation for taking points, doesn't it? Especially since at this point Montague is showing no signs of recovering. The trio see Montague's parents coming to the school, looking upset. He must be in pretty bad shape, no? I don't recall Ron's parents coming to the school when he was recovering from the dragon bit in the hospital wing for a number of days. Or Hermione's parents when she was stuck in polyjuice cat form. It kind of bugged me when Hermione asked if Ron and Harry if they should tell someone what they know, and Ron's response was basically who cares, he's a Slytherin. In character for Ron, but it seems a bit out of character for Hermione to just let it drop. This is the one and only time I can say that she reminded me of Lupin in the pensieve scene. Perhaps she just didn't want to set Harry and his temper off again, but it seems that Hermione chose what was easy over what she knew to be right. As to Debbie's question - which view if any does JKR endorse? I really don't know whether she is endorsing any view. I tend to think that she is trying to promote some introspection on the part of the reader. Why is it when she presents certain episodes, they provoke a particular emotional reaction when it involves one of our beloved characters - yet when she takes the same situation and flips it around, we have a very different emotional reaction when it involves a character we don't necessarily like. From gbannister10 at aol.com Fri Nov 5 22:31:42 2004 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Fri, 05 Nov 2004 22:31:42 -0000 Subject: forms of address In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117308 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" wrote: > > Carol: > > > Do any Brits on the list, preferably male, recognize a schoolboy > > > pattern carried into adulthood here, for the adult male > > > characters--and for McGonagall? > > > > > > Carol, with apologies for repeating previously expressed ideas but > > I'm still looking for responses from people with a British schoolboy > > > background > > > > Geoff: > > Please, Miss, I fall into the above requested category! > > > > :-) > > > > To save me reposting what I have said before, may I just say that I > > think I covered a lot of this is messages 115863 and 116253 which I > > hopes had clarified the position. > > My dear Geoff, > (Is it proper for a woman to say that? Compare DD's "my dear > Professor" to McGonagall. If not, please accept my apologies.) Geoff: Well, usually when somebody says to me "My Dear Geoff", it's usually in a long-suffering tone, implying that I am being exceptionally thick or have said something improper. Similarly, when I was teaching, if I went into the school office and the school secretary greeted me with "Geoffrey...", my reaction was always "OK, what have I done this time?" Some people still do that, knowing what my reaction will be..... :-) Carol: > I did read your posts carefully, but I don't see my questions > answered. I'm specifically comparing McGonagall to the nineteenth- > century English schoolboys in the biographies and literature I > cited earlier (Percy Shelley is a real-life example, David > Copperfield a literary one) who called their close male friends > by their last names both during their schooldays and in their > later lives. Are you familiar with this pattern, in literature, at > least? Does McGonagall seem to be following it, at least in PS > chapter one? (I did read what you wrote about office relationships, > etc. That's interesting, but it's the "schoolboy > pattern carried into adulthood" that I'm asking about--not nicknames > like those you mentioned, but last names for close friends.) Geoff: I think we may be talking a little at cross-purposes here. I've been looking at my own experiences from the 1950s up to present time. I think the situation was a bit different earlier. One of my favourite books - other than HP and LOTR(!) - is "To Serve Them all my Days" by R.F.Delderfield. I like it because it is about a schoolmaster, albeit in a public school, and it is also set on Exmoor where I now live. It chronicles the story of Davy, a young Welshman who is invalided out of the army in WW1 who comes to the school in 1918 and the story continues to 1940 when he has become the Headmaster. In it, the staff almost invariably call each other by their last names; the main exception is the Headmaster, who has helped Davy rehabilitate himself from his shell-shock and is on first name terms (from his side) because he is almost a father to our hero. Davy doesn't use his first name o his face until after he has retired. There are some women teachers but they tend to refer to other colleagues as "Mr." except the odd occasion when they might just use the surname when referring to that person in their absence. The boys rely on surnames or nicknames. Delderfield paints a good picture of school life in those times and I think he correctly reflects the pattern for the 1920s and 1930s. Carol: > Also, regarding Snape calling Lupin Lupin and Lupin calling Snape > Severus: What's up with that? Is Snape distancing Lupin or just using > the name he used in their schooldays? Is Lupin being polite or overly > friendly or something else? I think you said that last names weren't > appropriate between colleagues, but if that's what they used in their > schoolboy days, why not? Geoff: My take on it is that Lupin is a gentler, more polite person; without looking it up, I'm not sure whether he uses staff first names regularly but he certainly seems to address pupils by theirs. Snape rarely uses anyone's first name. Geoff http://www.aspectsofexmoor.com From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Fri Nov 5 22:34:18 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Fri, 05 Nov 2004 22:34:18 -0000 Subject: Dirty Harry/Clean Harry In-Reply-To: <20041029044050.7254.qmail@web53107.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117309 Kelsey wrote: > > While reading OOP, I thought the same thing, that Harry's anger and "darkness" (of mood not of morality) could very well be attributed to his connection of Voldemort and Harry's inability to break that connection. I think Harry even says that he finds himself having mood swings because of the way Voldemort is feeling. > Carol responds: I'm wondering if Harry's anger during Occlumency lessons, especially the first one when he's unable to clear his mind of anger and consequently can't resist Snape's intrusion into his mind, is related to Voldemort's already being there, in Harry's mind, not necessarily seeing what Harry is thinking but influencing his emotions, poisoning his mind through anger and hatred. I'm not suggesting that Voldemort knows what's going on here--as Snape tells Harry, Legilimency is not true mind-reading but an ability to sense emotions and, if the Legilimens and his victim are eye to eye, to see whatever memories are near the surface of the conscious mind. I'm only suggesting that here and throughout OoP Harry's anger is more intense, more vicious, more *venomous* than in any other book, as if Voldemort's own hatred is present in Harry's mind, poisoning him and opposing anyone (Snape or Dumbledore) that it senses is Voldemort's enemy. Twice we see Harry wanting to bite Dumbledore as if he (Harry) were the Voldemort-possessed venomous snake (Nagini?) that bit Mr. Weasley. Something similar happens, though not to the same degree, in the "Occlumency" chapter: "But Harry's anger at Snape continued to pound through his veins like venom," with the result that he's unable to block Snape's Legilimency spell and ends up seeing Cedric's dead body (OoP Am. ed. 535). Granted, Harry doesn't want to *bite* Snape (that would have made an interesting scene!) but there's a clear analogy of anger to venom, with the implication that anger is poisoning Harry's mind. Maybe it isn't Snape's fault, or Harry's, or Dumbledore's that the Occlumency lessons failed. Maybe the fault is Voldemort's. Carol From ginnysthe1 at yahoo.com Fri Nov 5 22:37:30 2004 From: ginnysthe1 at yahoo.com (ginnysthe1) Date: Fri, 05 Nov 2004 22:37:30 -0000 Subject: The only one he ever feared? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117310 Kim had written: >And doesn't OotP show that only the ones about whom the prophecy is written can open the prophecy sphere? So maybe TR went to the Ministry years before, found the "Dark Lord" sphere and opened it?< Then Khinterberg added: >If there was a prophecy about the coming of Voldemort and he himself found out about it, how would Dumbledore find out about it? Did he witness it? Did someone tell him? Or was his name involved as well, so he could pick it up and touch it?< Then Eustace Scrubb added: >The rise of Voldemort may well have been prophesied, and perhaps Dumbledore heard it. But if Tom Riddle already knew about the prophecy room at the MoM and had removed this prophecy from the shelf himself, he wouldn't have needed to spend months during OoP figuring out how to remove a prophecy, would he? First he tried to have a third party snatch it (was that Broderick Bode under an Imperius curse?), then Rookwood eventually told him that only those mentioned in the prophecy could do it.< Kim here: I'm still pondering Khinterberg's questions, but for now, to Eustace: I thought that in OotP LV had to stay away from the MoM and sent 3rd parties there instead because he was sure he would be intercepted by the MoM authorities if he was found there. Of course as you said, if Rookwood had to tell LV about who could or couldn't remove a prophecy orb (globe? sphere? -- anybody have the exact term handy?) from the shelf, that implies that LV *didn't* know this already and that TR hadn't been to the MoM years before as TR to find the "Dark Lord" prophecy as I suggested. Right now I can't even remember what I was thinking when I suggested that... OK, how about this: How did TR find out that he was the last heir of Slytherin? His father didn't tell him. Did his mother know and leave some sort of message for him before she died? But he'd have had to wait some years before he could read or understand such a message and he was in an orphanage pretty much right after she died, wasn't he, so where would the message have been kept in the meantime? Lately (like the last few days) I've been spending time conjecturing to myself on the details of TR's birth and childhood, the days before he came to Hogwarts to study as a wizard. How was he informed that he was eligible to study there? He was in a Muggle orphanage, wasn't he? Who, in a Muggle orphanage, would have received the owl mail from Hogwarts and given it to him? Then I started thinking about his confrontation with his father and grandparents at the house in Little Hangleton when he was 16: How did he know who these people were if he'd never met them before? What did he say to them before he AK'd them? Or did he just sneak up on them and go "kabam!"? Am I missing something? Repeating previously-asked questions? Asking too many questions...? (I know the answer to that one ;-)) Kim (who also asks many pardons for her inquisitive rambling, unless of course you didn't mind it) From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Fri Nov 5 23:13:43 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Fri, 05 Nov 2004 23:13:43 -0000 Subject: Crabbe as potential job applicant (or Snape's attitude) In-Reply-To: <20041029042120.16376.qmail@web53101.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117311 Kelsey wrote: > In GOF, we learn that Snape was a Death Eater and was publicly revealed to be a spy for Dumbledore (come on, Voldie and his spies just can't be that oblivious). And, in the cemetery scene, Voldie says, "One [missing Death Eater], who I believe has left me forever...he will be killed, of course..." I assumed he was referring to Snape who he knows betrayed him, who has refused to come that night. I really can't imagine that he's referring to Karkaroff (more likely "the coward"). Carol responds: I don't think Snape was ever publicly revealed as a Death Eater. There was only the original hearing with Crouch Sr., Dumbledore, and perhaps Alastor Moody and a few others present, and the later mention of Snape at the Karkaroff hearing, attended by some 200 high-ranking wizards. (There was evidently no publicity--no reporters as at Ludo Bagman's hearing--and Snape's name, unlike those of the DEs found innocent by reason of Imperio, was not in the papers.) There was a thread on this topic not too long ago, starting around post 115622 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/115622 in which we discussed reasons why the revelation Dumbledore mad at Karkaroff's hearing seems not to have leaked out to the wizarding public. It appears that Snape's role as spy was too valuable to be compromised--and in fact, his life would be in great danger if it were revealed that he was "no more a Death Eater than [Dumbledore]--so perhaps he's some sort of protected witness. (The DEs, however, would think that he had either not been captured or had gotten off in some clever, Slytherinish way.) Similarly, he could simply have explained to Lucius Malfoy, or even to Voldemort himself (using Occlumency) that he couldn't be in the graveyard because you can't apparate from Hogwarts. Anyway, this particular incident has been discussed time and again if you want to search the archives--not much fun with Yahoomort, I'm sorry to say. I do agree that Snape is the one Voldemort believes has left him forever and that Voldemort intended to have him killed. But since Voldemort didn't name him, none of the DEs except those who knew where Snape used to stand in the circle would necessarily know who was being referred to. And if Snape convinced Lucius of the apparation excuse, Lucius could convince any other DEs who doubted Snape's loyalty. I also agree that Snape is in ever-increasing danger even though his Occlumency and Slytherin cunning (and the magical protections surrounding Hogwarts) have saved him so far. But we do at least know that he'll survive to Book 7, so we don't need to worry about him quite yet. Besides, at the moment Voldemort has other concerns, mainly arranging a second prison break from Azkaban. Carol, who hopes we'll find out what Snape is doing for the Order in Book 6 From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sat Nov 6 00:36:15 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sat, 06 Nov 2004 00:36:15 -0000 Subject: Hogwarts Uniform In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117312 K wrote: > > but this is contradicted both by the flashback pensieve scene in > OoP and the shopping list they get at the start of PS. > > > > The school uniform consists of robes and nothing else. I suspect > muggleborns are more likely to wear stuff underneath. plus it's a large castle in Scotland - castles are drafty. > > > > K > Meri: > I always pictured them like they are on the covers of the American > hardcovers, with Muggle jeans and sneakers and sweaters underneath > robes. I believe that the reason they chose to do uniform like > outfits in the films was to make the kids look less like they were > wearing lame Halloween costumes. > Carol responds: I think K is right. We know that Snape wore only underwear under his robes as a schoolboy, and even that seems to be a concession to Muggle customs, as old Archie wears nothing under his nightgown. I can't imagine either of them wearing an open robe. I don't think that a pureblood like Draco would be caught dead in Muggle clothes, except *possibly* at King's Cross on the way to and from school. Like the young Snape, he probably wears only underwear (if that). I certainly don't think that pureblood adults, some of whom have only the vaguest notion of how Muggles dress, wear Muggle clothes under their robes, nor would they expect their children to do so at school. I picture the robes as resembling a priest's cassock or judge's gown rather than a bathrobe in being closed all around rather than open in front. I think the Hogwarts uniform would reflect the academic dress of a much earlier period, for example the cappa clausa, a *closed* full-length gown that was adopted at Oxford University in 1222. A cloak, OTOH, is open and sleeveless like a cape--highly effective if you're sweeping out of a room, though I suppose it would be worn indoors only if it's very cold, as in Snape's dungeons in winter. Carol, thinking that perhaps an American illustrator is not the best source of information on British academic traditions From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sat Nov 6 00:53:09 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sat, 06 Nov 2004 00:53:09 -0000 Subject: Lupin after the war (Was:The new headmaster) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117313 Carol earlier: > > I think it's overly optimistic to expect virtually the whole WW to > completely overcome its fear of werewolves, especially as they > do present a very real danger, but a good first step would be a > redefinition. Unlike giants, which really are nonhuman (and not > very amenable to reason, apparently), and unlike centaurs, > which really are half-human (whatever their origins), werewolves > are fully human--except for a short time each month, perhaps as > short as twenty-four hours, when they're fully beast. They are not > born through any union of human and wolf; they are created > when one afflicted human bites another. (JKR has said that the > werewolf cubs under Hagrid's bed were a lie on Tom Riddle's > part; the only werewolf cub is a werewolf child during the full > moon.) < > > Pippin responded: > A small canon correction: Lupin says that if Snape had found > him in the shack he'd have met "a fully grown werewolf" PoA ch > 18. I think Lupin is emphasizing here that werewolf cubs are > completely mythical. Even though Lupin was fifteen or sixteen > and not a full grown human, he turned into a full grown wolf -- or > have I missed something? > Carol again: I don't think you've missed anything, only that we're interpreting the "fully grown werewolf" quote differently. I'm assuming that, as Lupin was sixteen during the so-called Prank, he was either fully grown or very close to it, so his werewolf form would also be full grown. But he was bitten as a small child, possibly as young as three or four. I can't imagine a little boy that age turning into a full-grown beast. i think the implication of the quoted phrase is that werewolves, like children, start out small. As for the werewolf cubs being mythical, I read that as meaning that a female werewolf doesn't give birth to werecubs which could be kept under young Hagrid's bed. I think a female werewolf, if she were so unfortunate as to become pregnant, would give birth to a human child which would not inherit her malady because it hadn't been bitten (or, alternatively, would, like its mother, be human except during a full moon even if both mother and baby were in beast form at its birth. They babies, like most human babies, would be born singly (or as twins), not in a litter, and if young Rubeus were foolish enough to put one under his bed, he would find that it had turned into a human baby after the full moon ended. But JKR didn't say werewolf cubs were mythical, exactly. she said that Tom Riddle lied to frame Hagrid. here's the exact quote: Q: In Chamber of Secrets, Hagrid is supposed to have raised werewolf cubs under his bed. Are these the same kind of werewolves as Professor Lupin? JKR: No. Riddle was telling lies about Hagrid, just slandering him. http://www.quick-quote-quill.org/articles/2000/1000-livechat-barnesnoble.html So I hold to my view that little Remus was a werewolf child (or cub) when he transformed, becoming a fully grown werewolf only in his mid-to-late teens. Carol From mimbeltonia at yahoo.com Fri Nov 5 13:12:50 2004 From: mimbeltonia at yahoo.com (mimbeltonia) Date: Fri, 05 Nov 2004 13:12:50 -0000 Subject: Quills (was Re: Hogwarts Uniform with Link - OT) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117314 Potioncat wrote: > > ...edited... > > > > For that matter, has anyone ever tried to write with a quill? > > It's very difficult. I think the Muggle-born would be making > > a real mess of things, having to suddenly use them. (No wonder > > the Patil twins sneak in pencils.) >bboyminn replied: snip > I've often wondered, 'why quills?'. Wondered to such a degree that I > researched the history of writing instruments. snip > I can't imagine myself going to Hogwarts and stuggling away with > feather quills. At best, under normal use, a quill is only good for > about a week, and during that week requires frequent resharpening. > This frequent resharpening has given rise to the infamous 'pen- > knife'. snip Mimbeltonia now wonders: The history of writing instruments was very interesting reading. Thank you! However, I wonder, are the wizards sticking to 1700-century technology (or sometimes even older) because their version of it has been so much approved by magic that the newer muggle technology is not really better? Are the quills simply as the muggle writing tools were some hundred years ago, or is a wizard's quill something totally different? Could it be improved by self sharpening and anti-blot charms?? There is some stuff somewhere about "self-correcting ink". (I apologise for not having the reference ready - but I think it was banned for OWL exams, OotP) I get the impression that non of the muggle raised students complain about the inconvenience of using wizard tools and equipment... Mimbeltonia From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sat Nov 6 01:16:15 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sat, 06 Nov 2004 01:16:15 -0000 Subject: Dirty Harry / 'Good' Harry (WAS: The intended murder of Pettigrew and In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117315 Del: But when the Trio stole from Snape's office, they went against both the law and the school rules, and followed only their own self-serving morality. > I'm not saying it's a horrible thing to do per se, especially at the > age of 12, I'm just saying we can't ignore it. > > > Alla: > > And I am saying we can ignore it in that particular instance. Carol: So the end justifies the means? Isn't that the Slytherin ethic: "Those cunning folk use any means to achieve their ends"? Not to be trite, but surely the path to hell is paved with good intentions. Stealing is still stealing, even if you're Robin Hood. Also it wasn't really up to Harry and his friends to find out who the Heir of Slytherin was, nor did they accomplish much (except establishing Draco's innocence) by making a dangerous potion (look at what happened to Hermione) with stolen ingredients. They merely (re)established themselves as rule-breaking troublemakers in Snape's eyes. Carol From cat_kind at yahoo.com Fri Nov 5 14:41:39 2004 From: cat_kind at yahoo.com (cat_kind) Date: Fri, 05 Nov 2004 14:41:39 -0000 Subject: An Awful Thought In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117316 > Siriusly Snapey Susan: > While I agree that we'd be better off than w/ the Dickens example, > because the notes & final chapter exist, I take exception with the > statement that it probably wouldn't be that hard to do. > > Think of the discussion these books generate here. All the "what > if"s and "I wonder"s and "How is she going to"s that we discuss on & > on & on. I think someone could package up the bare bones of what > happens to Harry & Voldy and how it all ends, because it's probably > there somewhere. But to tie up all the loose ends we want? To help > us know at the end which were really red herrings and which were > clever clues to be brought back in at a later point? I think it'd be > incredibly difficult to do. catkind: Interesting, SS. Supposing, as I don't like killing off innocent authors, that Rowling decides she's bored of HP and wants to spend the rest of her life fly-fishing in antarctica. Who should they hire to finish the series? Or should it be a committee? In answer to SSS - I'd think all the loose-end-tying will be in JKRs notes for our hypothetical hired hand to use. She must have been pretty careful about what clues she's leaving where. As for us poor punters, no I don't think we're going to guess very near. Thus far there has been a huge number of new characters, new creatures and new sorts of magic in each new book. Whatever happens next seems likely to involve new stuff and people too, so I don't think we're going to guess particularly near by just tying up loose ends. Or what do people think? Will there be less new characters in the last books? Might be necessary just to keep the size down... (Another random question: where will the new characters in the next books come from? So far, we have obvious candidates like the new DADA teacher, new MoM. I suggest more Unspeakables. Goblins, maybe. What else?) So yes, we could construct an ending to answer our current questions and tie up as many loose ends as we can be bothered to tie, as loads of fanfiction authors have, but I expect JKR to create more questions and leave plenty of loose ends for discussion even after book 7. catkind From seriouslyserious2004 at yahoo.com Fri Nov 5 17:08:24 2004 From: seriouslyserious2004 at yahoo.com (seriouslyserious2004) Date: Fri, 05 Nov 2004 17:08:24 -0000 Subject: An Awful Thought In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117317 > Siriusly Snapey Susan: > While I agree that we'd be better off than w/ the Dickens example, > because the notes & final chapter exist, I take exception with the > statement that it probably wouldn't be that hard to do. > > Think of the discussion these books generate here. All the "what > if"s and "I wonder"s and "How is she going to"s that we discuss on & > on & on. I think someone could package up the bare bones of what > happens to Harry & Voldy and how it all ends, because it's probably > there somewhere. But to tie up all the loose ends we want? To help > us know at the end which were really red herrings and which were > clever clues to be brought back in at a later point? I think it'd be > incredibly difficult to do. Yes, there are many different possibilities for how the books could be completed. I would imagine that many of them would work nicely, and that all of them would leave someone disappointed. Besides, I'm feeling pretty confident that even JKR isn't going to tie up all the lose ends we want tied up. So long as the new author were a good writer, I think the chances that he or she could turn out a good book 6 and book 7 are about as good as the odds that JKR will. SS From mimbeltonia at yahoo.com Fri Nov 5 14:41:58 2004 From: mimbeltonia at yahoo.com (mimbeltonia) Date: Fri, 05 Nov 2004 14:41:58 -0000 Subject: Dobby house elf for Potters? (Was Re: Why were Harry's parents so rich?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117318 > "ab35ppw" wrote: > > I have often wondered if Dobby was the Potter's house elf and > > if that was why he was able to help Harry and knew where to > > find Harry even though Privet drive has protections around it. > > Inkling now: > > How does an elf pass from one family to another, especially such > very different and unrelated --well, who knows who's related to > who, I'm sure we'll learn a great deal more on that score -- so > let's say antagonistic families as the Potters and the Malfoys? Mimbeltonia has a sudden -maybe a bit too rash- idea: Could the Malfoy Estate be the original "Potter Estate", somehow tricked or forced from James' parents by the Death Eater Malfoy during the first WW?? The house elf went with the house for some complex reason (maybe also the reason why Dobby can't tell Harry), but James was able to save an important part of the fortune... What do you think??? -Mimbeltonia From snapesangel2002 at yahoo.co.uk Fri Nov 5 21:07:36 2004 From: snapesangel2002 at yahoo.co.uk (laura) Date: Fri, 05 Nov 2004 21:07:36 -0000 Subject: Totally Obssessed - Found It! - Spinners End - Near BRISTOL! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117319 Earlier, Geoff wrote: > Crikey, chaps and chapesses, this thread is getting worse than > Vauxhall Road..... > > :-) Yeeesssss.... it's all looking a bit tangled, isn't it? I'll try and explain my take on the possible SE/GH/Bristol link... and yes, this is *pure speculation* of course: 1) The Potters are murdered the evening of October 31st at their home in Godrics Hollow - where it is I have no idea or theory yet. 2) That same night, Hagrid rescues baby Harry from GH, then disappears for near on 24 hours. 3) During this time, Dumbledore is making preparations for Harry to live at the Dursleys, sealing the protective charm, etc. Some time before *he* arrives at the Dursleys, he has made contact with Hagrid, telling him where the Dursleys live, and what time to bring Harry. 4)The following night, Nov.1st, Hagrid arrives with Harry at Privet Drive. But *where* have they been all this time? 5) This is where the speculation about Spinners End comes in. Wherever Hagrid and Harry were, they flew over Bristol to get to Little Whinging. And SE being near Bristol will lead some people (me included) to believe that that is where Hagrid and Harry went after leaving GH. 6) SE could well have been the safest place for Harry at that time, bearing in mind there were numbers of DEs out looking for their master. 7) The other clue is that CH1 of HBP was intended for PS/SS originally, and then later books as well, but it didn't fit. I'm just guessing here, but say that CH1 HBP reveals more about the circumstances of that night Oct.31st? Now imagining that chapters 1 and 2 are closely linked, see how SE can be thought of as the answer to the missing 24 hrs mystery? And the reason it fits in HBP could be because it's the new OotP headquarters (assuming they need new headquarters). As it's Harry's shortest stay in Privet Drive so far, it wouldn't surprise me if he were reunited with the Weasleys etc by CH.2: Spinners End. That's just a summary of the theory anyway, I hope I've made a little bit of sense to someone. Feel free to rip it apart. When HBP comes out and Spinners End turns out to be a tea-shop or something more mundane, I'll eat my words I promise! Laura* From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Sat Nov 6 01:28:04 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Sat, 06 Nov 2004 01:28:04 -0000 Subject: Dirty Harry / 'Good' Harry (WAS: The intended murder of Pettigrew and In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117320 > Carol: > So the end justifies the means? Isn't that the Slytherin ethic: "Those > cunning folk use any means to achieve their ends"? Not to be trite, > but surely the path to hell is paved with good intentions. Stealing is > still stealing, even if you're Robin Hood. Alla: Yes, Carol, I believe that in this instance the end justifies the means. And NO, I don't believe that this is exactly Slytherin ethics, even though it is quite similar, I concede. Who says that Slytherin ethics cannot be useful sometimes, as long as it is not the proclamation of pureblood superiority? I also don't believe that Trio is doomed to Hell in Potterverse. As I said many times - most of the times their rulebreaking is for good purpose, for the purpose of helping people. Not always, of course, but most of the times. I firmly believe that JKR approves of rulebreaking for "SELFLESS" reasons so to speak. In this case, I am definitely going with authoritarian intent as I interpret it(it does not mean that you should, of course :o)) By the way, Robin Hood was one of my favourite heroes of all time. Carol: > Also it wasn't really up to Harry and his friends to find out who the > Heir of Slytherin was, Alla: Many, many things were not supposed to be done by Harry and his friends, I shudder to think what would happened if they did not step up to the plate. :o) Carol: nor did they accomplish much (except > establishing Draco's innocence) by making a dangerous potion (look at > what happened to Hermione) with stolen ingredients. Alla: True, Draco turned out to be innocent. I still say investigation was done with good intent in mind. Carol: They merely > (re)established themselves as rule-breaking troublemakers in Snape's eyes. > Alla: Ummm. I don't think Snape NEEDED any re-establishment. I think he established Harry as a rule-breaker before he even came to Hogwarts and still nto willing to let this motion go. :) From templar1112002 at yahoo.com Sat Nov 6 01:29:23 2004 From: templar1112002 at yahoo.com (templar1112002) Date: Sat, 06 Nov 2004 01:29:23 -0000 Subject: Totally Obssessed - Found It! - Spinners End - Near BRISTOL! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117321 "laura" wrote: > > JKR grew up in Chepstow, not far from me (I live in Newport). I've > just checked on the Route Planner at www.theaa.com , and Spinners End > is in Weston-Super-Mare, 40 miles from Chepstow, and only 24 miles > from Bristol. > > Like others, I think Spinners End is where Hagrid took Harry in those > missing 24 hours. > > I've been wondering why JK has given us this particular chapter > title, knowing we'd all be looking for its location. Is she giving us > a clue or throwing us off scent? It's fun though ;) > ******Just to add to the fun of all this wild, wild guessing, and since this is a site in which what follows would not raise an eyebrow, , what do you think of this: "... The scene seemed momentarily frozen. Harry, Ginny, and Neville and each of the Death Eaters turned in spite of themselves to watch the top of the tank as a brain burst from the green liquid like a leaping fish. For a moment it seemed suspended in midair, then it soared toward Ron, spinning as it came, and what looked like ribbons of moving images flew from it, unraveling like rolls of film -- But the thin ribbons were spinning around Ron's chest now. He tugged and tore at them as the brain was pulled tight against him like an octopus's body. ..." OoTP page 798, h/c SE. WT*????!!!!???? Yeah, that was my reaction when I read that somewhere else... Do you think that Spinners End could be somehow related to this brain scene? BTW, I apologize if this has already been debated or brought up, I wasn't able to follow this thread too well. Marcela From empooress at yahoo.com Sat Nov 6 00:53:05 2004 From: empooress at yahoo.com (Kim McGibony) Date: Fri, 5 Nov 2004 16:53:05 -0800 (PST) Subject: Did the Potters know the prophecy? In-Reply-To: <1099656767.8539.8837.m12@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <20041106005305.41499.qmail@web52106.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 117322 > Kate wrote: > > In the middle of reading PoA (again), I began to > wonder, did Lily and James know about the prophecy? > > So, a spy for the Order tipped off DD telling him > Lily and James were in danger, but didn't he already > know they were in danger (either them or the Longbottoms, > or both) because he heard the prophecy about a baby born > to parents who defied Voldemore thrice. > > To me, a cold, wet night indicates winter, or early > spring. This would had to have been before Harry was born, > Lily already pregnant. But the Potters don't go into hiding > until Harry is around 1 year old. Remember the bit about having defied Voldy three times perhaps at the time of Harry's birth that had not yet occured. And I would think that the Longbottoms also had gone into hiding as well. I would think that both sets of parents had been told about the prophecy. Come to think of, I wonder how Voldy's followers knew where to find the Longbottoms so soon after the attack. While the canon does not give a specific time, it does seem to indicate that it occured shortly after the attack on the Potters, as the followers where tring to find out where Voldy was, so that appears to me that they did not know what had happened at Godic's Hollow. Empooress From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Sat Nov 6 01:34:03 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Sat, 06 Nov 2004 01:34:03 -0000 Subject: An Awful Thought In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117323 Siriusly Snapey Susan: > > While I agree that we'd be better off than w/ the Dickens > > example, because the notes & final chapter exist, I take > > exception with the statement that it probably wouldn't be that > > hard to do. > > > > Think of the discussion these books generate here. All > > the "what if"s and "I wonder"s and "How is she going to"s that > > we discuss on & on & on. I think someone could package up the > > bare bones of what happens to Harry & Voldy and how it all ends, > > because it's probably there somewhere. But to tie up all the > > loose ends we want? To help us know at the end which were > > really red herrings and which were clever clues to be brought > > back in at a later point? I think it'd be incredibly difficult > > to do. catkind: > In answer to SSS - I'd think all the loose-end-tying will be in > JKRs notes for our hypothetical hired hand to use. She must have > been pretty careful about what clues she's leaving where. > > Thus far there has been a huge number of new characters, new > creatures and new sorts of magic in each new book. Whatever > happens next seems likely to involve new stuff and people too, so > I don't think we're going to guess particularly near by just tying > up loose ends. SSSusan: But isn't this a bit of an insult to JKR's writing? Even having boxes & boxes full of notes and a final chapter, wouldn't it take some *talent* to bring it all together to the standard we're used to? Maybe I wasn't clear in what I said previously. I wasn't meaning we need JKR *just* to tie up loose ends, nor that I expected her to tie up *all*of them, but rather that to make it all work at the level we expect *and* to tie up lots of the loose ends, we need her. I'm not saying no one else could manage it, but the original statement sounded to me as if that person thought it would be no big deal to pick up the pieces & complete the series. Well, I guess I give JKR more credit than that. There may be notes and outlines, but the connections & vision are in her head. You mentioned potential new characters, too. Since no one besides JKR would have "met" these characters, how could anyone else be sure about fleshing them out? Maybe the difference between my view and others' is that I'm not much of a fan of fanfiction. I've read maybe 4 or 5 authors I think are pretty good, and one work which I think is truly phenomenal. It might be lots of fun for people to make their own attempts at it, but, for me, I believe the only way we'll get a proper finish is if JKR herself issues it. IMHO, of course. Siriusly Snapey Susan From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sat Nov 6 02:53:12 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sat, 06 Nov 2004 02:53:12 -0000 Subject: Black and white and read all over. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117324 Nora wrote: > > I speak only for myself, but some of us are *gasp* actually more interested in little things like analysis and interpretation than plot speculation--that is to say, it's really a matter of interest what it means and how it fits together, in addition to the (perhaps mere) question of what's going to happen. As such, it's interesting what the actions of a character might mean or be read as, rather than simply the actions that they take in the plot itself. There are perhaps hidden joys for the theorist to be found in interpretation, as well--when you have some idea what a character is about and what he represents, you can start to rank your guesses about future and past actions a little more intelligently. > > > > Kneasy: > Huh. And what are you going to do with these wonderful analyses and interpretations? Sit tight and then declaim on your insight when all is finally revealed? In this instance analyses and interpretations are tools to lever open the plot structure, not ends in and of themselves. Because quite frankly I think that many of the current interpretations are misleading or plain wrong. All the information is not yet in, things will change, surprises will be sprung. However, for sure JKR has cunningly slipped in clues and pointers (along with a barrel-load of red herrings) and they're not just intended for her own entertainment, that much she admits. She *expects* us to take up the challenge of perhaps beating her to the draw. She doesn't think we'll do it, but that just underlines the challange IMO. Sitting meekly waiting to be spoon-fed is not something I'm comfortable with. I don't mind being beaten, I don't mind being wrong, but doing nothing is not acceptable. It implies that one is happy not to think, that existing canon is the be-all and end-all of HP so close down and put your mind in neutral. > > Now if after analysis and interpretation we progress to extrapolation based on conclusions drawn and possibilities considered, then things can get very interesting. Not necessarily right, but certainly more fun than sitting twiddling our thumbs waiting for the next book to come along and tell us what to believe. > Carol responds: Speculation (including conspiracy theories) is certainly fun now, an enjoyable way to fill in the long hiatus between one book and the next, but once the seventh book is in, the plot will be revealed and, after numerous complaints from all sides about unsatisfactory resolutions and plotholes (because there's no possible way for JKR to fulfill anyone's expectations but her own), the conspiracy theorists will have nothing more to do. (Good luck finding another series in progress that offers as much meat as this one!) But those of us who are interested in analyzing the characters' motivations and relationships or interpreting themes, symbols, motifs, atmosphere, setting, narrative technique, and all the other elements of a literary work will be able to look at the series as a completed whole. Rather than being finished with the books, setting them aside now that all our yes-or-no, good-or-evil questions have been answered, we'll be able to make a fresh start in understanding the HP books and their significance. "What it means and how it fits together" will still be relevant ten or a hundred years from today; puppetmaster! Dumbledore and Secret agent! Peter will be, if not dead in the water, at least dead horses that no longer need to be beaten as soon as the seventh book is in our hands. Carol, who hopes that the younger list members will still be civilly debating the meaning of the books and fitting the pieces together in 2050, when Snape is Headmaster of Hogwarts ;-) From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sat Nov 6 03:24:04 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sat, 06 Nov 2004 03:24:04 -0000 Subject: The length of the Pensieve Scene In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117325 bboyminn (Steve) wrote: > I think we are dealing with two separate but related things. At the > top is Snape's intellectual decision to hide that particular memory. > Next is Snape's own SUBCONSCIOUS attachment to that memory. > > In his intellect, he wants to hide his humiliation from Harry, but > subconsciously he can't detach himself from his emotions about being a 'victim'. In order to be a 'victim' he has to be innocent, minding his own business, and subjected to an /unprovoked/ attack. > > We could speculate that there were many other occassions when Snape > was the attacker; when he attacked James without provocation. But > subconsciously those instances, which by the way, he probably also > hide in the pensieve, don't re-enforce his 'I didn't to anything to > them' point of view. Carol responds: I have only one objection to your analysis, the speculation that he probably his some unprovoked attacks on James in the Pensieve. He selected only three memories; there must have been dozens of hexing incidents, some with James and others with Severus as the initiator. (We're told by Lily that James hexed anyone who annoyed him; he was no hero at that point in his life.) We also have a glimpse of minor but painful childhood memories that did *not* go into the Pensieve. We know that became a Death Eater and then renounced the Death Eaters and spied for Dumbledore. We also know that he's doing something very dangerous and very secret from the Order now. Surely there are many things that he not only wanted but *needed* to hide from Harry--and from Voldemort, who probably could not see the Occlumency lessons but could at some point access Snape's memories if Harry witnessed them. Whatever else was in that Pensieve was not, I would bet my computer (on second thought, a used, secondhand copy of "Silas Marner"!), a trivial childhood memory related to James. It was related in some way to the DEs and Voldemort. And removing such memories was in on way an unfair advantage over Harry. It was absolutely necessary that they be protected, and absolutely necessary that Snape access Harry's dream and any thoughts that Voldemort might be planting in Harry's head and report them to Dumbledore. (That, if I'm not mistaken, was Dumbledore's real motive in making Harry take Occlumency lessons.) Carol From snow15145 at yahoo.com Sat Nov 6 04:30:29 2004 From: snow15145 at yahoo.com (snow15145) Date: Sat, 06 Nov 2004 04:30:29 -0000 Subject: Family ties. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117326 Kneasy: I read the possession at the Ministry as a ploy, a last gasp effort that would persuade DD to zap Harry in the hopes of nailing Voldy or forcing him out of Harry. Snow: Exactly! Voldemort does not recognize the entire connection between himself and Harry. Voldy does not attempt to reconnect to what he does not know lies inside of Harry. Voldy does not know that a bit of himself was left inside Harry that night all he knows is that Harry can see inside of him. Realizing that Harry has the ability to see into Voldy, Voldy then says to himself, I will visualize what I want Harry to see if the little so-and-so can see or feel what I am feeling. Voldy doesn't realize the whole connection only that there is a connection and uses it to its seemingly worth. When Voldy showed himself at the Ministry, the last thing he wanted to do was to attempt to possess Harry. This was not a plan to invade the boy in an attempt to reconnect as if he knew that part of himself was in Harry. As you put it, it was a last gasp effort, which I agree it was. Voldy is totally unaware that any part of him is locked up inside of Harry. Voldy does however know that Harry does have access to his feelings and thoughts and therefore if Voldy dwells on certain thoughts he realizes that Harry does too. When Dumbledore cornered Voldy all Voldy could do was retaliate. I don't see this as a premeditated plan on Voldy's behalf. Voldy used the resources at hand, to get a rise out of Dumbledore, and it did the question is did Voldy notice `that the boy meant more to him than just headmaster and pupil'? Dumbledore refrained from reaction because he knew that the boy (Harry) would most likely persevere. Voldy is left with doubts as to how meaningful the boy is to Dumbledore given the noncompliance to the request. If Dumbledore didn't attempt to save Harry then he must be discountable. Kneasy: What if - when he withdrew the fragment of himself inside Harry was re-united with the rest of the Voldy mind. No evidence either way yet, and the first hint in the next book would be if Harry's scar starts playing up again. If it does then Voldy's still in there. But if it doesn't then he isn't. Snow: A smidge of a hint Harry can speak and look at Dumbledore without the resurfacing anger that he had been prone to since summer. The Reconnection Factor. Voldy is whole again but in what sence? No immortality, his spine is made of muggle, his guts of a betrayer (for what side is still, imo, undetermined) and his blood is sacrificial. Voldy is fighting a losing battle because he doesn't know who he's fighting maybe himself? Snow From snow15145 at yahoo.com Sat Nov 6 04:34:44 2004 From: snow15145 at yahoo.com (snow15145) Date: Sat, 06 Nov 2004 04:34:44 -0000 Subject: Black and white and read all over. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117327 Carol snipped: Speculation (including conspiracy theories) is certainly fun now, an enjoyable way to fill in the long hiatus between one book and the next, but once the seventh book is in, the plot will be revealed and, after numerous complaints from all sides about unsatisfactory resolutions and plotholes (because there's no possible way for JKR to fulfill anyone's expectations but her own), the conspiracy theorists will have nothing more to do. (Good luck finding another series in progress that offers as much meat as this one!) Snow: Of course I cannot speak for all theorists on the list but I personally give JKR every "author"ity and will appreciate any ending she has in store. I just feel that it is my, so to speak, job to try to attempt to beat her to the punch. It's a great mind game. How much of this story can I possibly figure out within the extreme limits, or limitations, of the clues that have been given thus far? It is quite intriguing! Like you have said, and I totally agree, I have yet to find an author that has challenged me to this degree. Carol: Carol, who hopes that the younger list members will still be civilly debating the meaning of the books and fitting the pieces together in 2050, when Snape is Headmaster of Hogwarts ;-) Snow: I couldn't agree more that many will find these books as intriguing (insert any adjective, they will all be correct) as we have had the privilege and impatience to theorize over while in the making. All of us are just a minute part of history in the making. Snow From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sat Nov 6 04:57:05 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sat, 06 Nov 2004 04:57:05 -0000 Subject: What we find there (was: How to Get Through the Door)--SPOILERS!!! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117328 > > Wait for it.... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Terpnurse - breaking free from lurkdom: > > > > My first thought when I saw that title was Aragog. Spiders are > > certainly known spinners. Perhaps Harry & Co. are going to revisit the > > Spinners at the End of the path? > Kneasy: > Yeah, that was the way my thoughts lurched too. Acromantula. > Nice opportunity for Ron to have the heebie-jeebies again, > maybe even end up as sushi for arachnids, for Aragog to come > clean if he knows more about the Chamber than he admitted > first time around - quite a few possibles on this line if you favour it. Carol: The problem with this reading is that Spinners End is Chapter 2 and they wouldn't be at Hogwarts yet. I think "end" = cul de sac and Spinners End is the deadend street where we'll find the new Order Head quarters. JKR did say we'd meet the spiders again, but surely not this early in Book 6. Carol > From angelsound2001 at yahoo.com Sat Nov 6 05:09:45 2004 From: angelsound2001 at yahoo.com (angelsound2001 at yahoo.com) Date: Fri, 5 Nov 2004 21:09:45 -0800 (PST) Subject: Chapter 29, Career Advice - Broken Potion In-Reply-To: <1099694017.104264.44883.m23@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <20041106050945.94621.qmail@web40707.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 117329 I had always interpreted Snape's "Whoops" as a dig at Harry for not seeing to the safety of the potion. I thought perhaps Harry had set it down in a precarious place and turned away just before it fell, and Snape was taunting him for his own clumsiness. Snape may be several things too nasty to name here, but I can't imagine he would *admit* breaking the potion and then tell Harry he would receive "no marks." Not sure if this is right; just thought I'd offer an alternate reading. --Raven __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sat Nov 6 05:28:37 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sat, 06 Nov 2004 05:28:37 -0000 Subject: Draco's POV? (Was: What we find there [behind the door] )--SPOILERS!!! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117330 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "cubfanbudwoman" wrote: > > SSSusan wrote: > > > > > > S > > > P > > > O > > > I > > > L > > > E > > > R > > > S > > > P > > > A > > > C > > > E > > > > > > > > > > > > 2) Draco's detour to visit daddy in Azkaban, perhaps? > > > ***kitten: > > secondly it would be to hard to do with the books being in Harry's > > pov.... > > > Siriusly Snapey Susan: > We have seen JKR depart from this previously, though. The scene > which comes to mind for me is Frank Bryce & the Riddles. > Carol: True, but those chapters were at the beginning of the book, rather like the use in SS/PS chapter 1 of Vernon Dursley's POV and an objective (impersonal) narrator who couldn't enter *anybody's* mind in the scene with Dumbledore, McGonagall and Hagrid. The narrator at the beginning of GoF is similar, distant and objective and not entering anybody's mind. There's a subtle switch to Frank's PoV where the chapter breaks on p. 4 (Am. ed.) and we witness the conversation between Voldemort and Wormtail through his eyes and as he dies we're back to the objective narrator who provides the transition to Harry. And then we're back in familiar territory. Harry has dreamed the whole scene. How and why Harry sees from Frank's PoV is never explained, and certainly the opening paragraphs are not part of the dream--we know about the Riddles because the narrator tells us, but Harry doesn't. Could a similar tactic be used for Draco, a character we already know, in Chapter 6? Surely, as a prefect, he won't miss the opportunity to ride on the Hogwarts Express and start bossing people around. And he might lose the position if he neglected his duties by not being on board. It's possible that, after his initial duties are performed, he'll return to his cronies and Harry can overhear a conversation about Draco's Detour to Azkaban. Or it might not be Azkaban at all--maybe Harry will again overhear Draco in Knockturn Alley--minus his father this time. Maybe Harry, wearing the invisibility cloak, will follow him into Borgin and Burkes. I don't know!! It just seems to me that JKR, having established Harry as her PoV character for the first five chapters (or second through fifth if she uses an objective narrator to take us back in time to Godric's Hollow in chapter one) is unlikely to switch to Draco as the PoV character for one chapter, or to use an impersonal narrator for a chapter devoted to him. The only way I can think of for us to hear his story is for Harry to witness it or overhear him talking about it. Anyone else have any ideas how JKR could present Draco's story without departing drastically from previously established narrative techniques? Carol From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sat Nov 6 05:50:09 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sat, 06 Nov 2004 05:50:09 -0000 Subject: Why has DD never suggested Harry thank Snape? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117331 "queen_astrofiammante" wrote: > Thanks for an interesting post, which I enjoyed reading. Here, > briefly, is something that occurs to me about Snape. How is he > regarded, not by Dumbledore, not by Harry and his other pupils, but > by his colleagues and by other adults? > > I shouldn't think Hagrid likes him much, but can't remember any > specific references off the top of my head. I'm sure there are some > if other people care to post them. Similarly, I can't remember there > being much from Flitwick or Sprout. Carol" In SS/PS, when the Trio suspects Snape of trying to steal the stone and later of trying to kill Harry by cursing him in the Quidditch match, Hagrid tells them that Professor Snape wouldn't do that. And Hagrid is proven right when Harry encounters Quirrellmort near the end of the book. I can find the page refs if you want them. As for Flitwick and Sprout, check the scene near the end of CoS where all the teachers, notably the other three Heads of Houses, follow Snape's lead in exposing Lockhart as a coward and a fraud: )"The man! The very man!") Again, I can find the page number if you want it. Carol, who trusts Dumbledore's judgment in trusting Snape From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sat Nov 6 06:37:03 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sat, 06 Nov 2004 06:37:03 -0000 Subject: Theo Nott Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117332 We know that JKR has given Theo Nott a personality and a background even though we've seen little of him so far, so it's a safe bet that we'll see more of him in Book 6. I hope he doesn't get tossed back into the story with no consideration of how he's spent what must have been a terrible summer. (Yes, he's a Slytherin. Yes, his father is a DE. But except for one moment at the end of OoP, we've never seen him with Draco, and I'm inclined to give him a little sympathy, or at least the benefit of a doubt. and if he finds out how Draco's father treated *his* father in the DoM, they won't be friends long if they are friends now.) Has anyone given thought to the question of who's taking care of Theo now? Would a sixteen-year-old motherless boy whose father is in Azkaban (or St. Mungo's) be living on his own? A guest of the Malfoys (Narcissa and Draco)? A temporary ward of his Head of House, Professor Snape? Thoughts, anybody? Carol From bboyminn at yahoo.com Sat Nov 6 07:35:10 2004 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Sat, 06 Nov 2004 07:35:10 -0000 Subject: The length of the Pensieve Scene In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117333 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" wrote: > > bboyminn (Steve) wrote: > > > I think we are dealing with two separate but related things. At the > > top is Snape's intellectual decision to hide that particular memory. > > Next is Snape's own SUBCONSCIOUS attachment to that memory. > > > > ... subconsciously he can't detach himself from his emotions about > > being a 'victim'. ... > > > > We could speculate ... other occassions when Snape was the > > attacker; when he attacked James without provocation. .., he > > probably also hide (those) in the pensieve, ... > > Carol responds: > I have only one objection to your analysis, the speculation that he > probably his some unprovoked attacks on James in the Pensieve. He > selected only three memories; there must have been dozens of hexing > incidents, some with James and others with Severus as the initiator. > > ...edited... > > Whatever else was in that Pensieve was not, I would bet my computer > ..., ... was related in some way to the DEs and Voldemort. ... It > was absolutely necessary that they be protected, and absolutely > necessary that Snape access Harry's dream and any thoughts that > Voldemort might be planting in Harry's head and report them to > Dumbledore. > > Carol bboyminn: While I have no problem with your overal conclusions, I do take exception to one point- "...He (Snape) selected only three memories; ..." What you mean is that /we/ only /see/ Snape put three memories in the Pensieve because Harry only sees three. (Note: I didn't look it up, I'm taking you at your word.) But Snape may have been storing memories in the Pensieve for half an hour before Harry arrived; he may have stored dozen of memories. Again, I do agree that Snape would have surely stored any sensitive information about Dumbledore & The Order, and Voldemort & the Death Eaters. Additionally, I agree that Harry wasn't afforded the same courtesy of storing sensitive memories because it would have been important for Dumbledore, via Snape & the Occlymency lessons, to know if Harry were receiving any /visions/ that might pose a potential threat or risk. Just wanted to make that one point. Steve/bboyminn (was bboy_mn) From jlnbtr at yahoo.com Sat Nov 6 01:57:33 2004 From: jlnbtr at yahoo.com (Juli) Date: Fri, 5 Nov 2004 17:57:33 -0800 (PST) Subject: Muggle World (Was: Quills) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041106015733.10816.qmail@web53108.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 117334 > Mimbeltonia: Are the quills simply as the muggle writing > tools were some hundred years ago, or is a wizard's > quill something totally different? Could it be > improved by self sharpening and anti-blot charms?? > I get the impression that non of the muggle raised > students complain about the inconvenience of using > wizard tools and equipment... Juli now: I was just thinking, if I was a muggle-born witch, will I complain about the quills? Probably not, there'd be a lot of things I'd miss more: the internet, clothes (a nice designer dress), a portable CD player, cable TV. So many things I just love about the muggle world, I'm not saying there're many things to do at the WW and many more things to do for fun, but honestly, owl mail, as extremely cool as it is, is never as fast as email. But I would change my life in a heartbeat to be a member of the witch world. Back to quills, I agree with Mimbeltonia, they must have some magic in them to make them work better than muggle quills. I would feel silly taking notes in my Potions class with a regular pen, it just doesn't feel right, just like wearing jeans under the robes. Besides, I don't think the robes are anything like a judge's, in GoF Fleur says she won't be able to fit in her gown, which means they aren't so wide as to make you feel like a nun, they must have some shape. Juli wondering why she's thought so much about wizard clothes From mablake at pacbell.net Sat Nov 6 04:36:15 2004 From: mablake at pacbell.net (John) Date: Sat, 06 Nov 2004 04:36:15 -0000 Subject: Etymology of "Death Eater" (was Re: With enemies like these.....) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117335 > Carol responds: > The idea of Death Eaters eating bottled death strikes me as > some sort of evil parody of the communion service in which Catholics, > Episcopalians, and various other Christian denominations (Lutherans?) > symbolically eat the body and blood of Christ to share in his > resurrection. Are the DEs eating Voldemort's death or their own? Hi Carol In RC the belief is in transubstanation, the wafer is the actual body and the wine the actual blood, after the priest has performed the ritual. Johnnie From mablake at pacbell.net Sat Nov 6 04:44:35 2004 From: mablake at pacbell.net (John) Date: Sat, 06 Nov 2004 04:44:35 -0000 Subject: forms of address In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117336 > Carol: > Do any Brits on the list, preferably male, recognize a > schoolboy pattern carried into adulthood here, for the > adult male characters--and for McGonagall? Hi Carol Frank Richards wrote a series of books called Billy Bunter. They portray the British school system for that era. Johnnie From kjones at telus.net Sat Nov 6 05:39:17 2004 From: kjones at telus.net (Kathryn Jones) Date: Fri, 05 Nov 2004 21:39:17 -0800 Subject: Occlumency: Relax or resist? (Was: CHAPTER DISCUSSION: Chapter 29, Career Advice In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <418C6385.2070609@telus.net> No: HPFGUIDX 117337 Lupinlore wrote: > sufficient to show that, under Snape's tutelage, Harry finally > managed *something*. That isn't, in and of itself, particularly > impressive nor does it necessarily speak well of Snape's teaching > methods. > > To use the martial arts analogy, it's true that if you train with a > master who attacks you full out every day, you will eventually block > one or two blows. That doesn't mean you've learned much and it > doesn't mean that's a very good way of teaching. Actually, having done the martial arts thing myself, I found that without a great deal of paranoia, constant vigilance, and the practice of dodging unexpected blows from your companions, it was impossible to gain the necessary instinctual response to attack that is necessary to defense. Even with this practice, over the course of years, my immediate response was to block an attack. I consistently failed to counter the attack properly. I did not have a reliable response to attack because I did not fear my attackers and of course we did not severely injure each other. With this in mind, Snape was the most likely to be successful in teaching Harry to develop instinctual and reliable reaction to the feel of legilimency being performed on his mind. He did in fact learn to do this. Snape made him feel threatened enough to defend. If you think it was painful and difficult for Harry, think of how Snape must have felt at encouraging a student to face him with a wand and allow the student to hex him, said student, perhaps containing some part of the mind of Voldemort. Snape did not become angry with Harry for the stinging hex, or using "protego". He became "infuriated" when Harry did not defend. Snape might not be a nice person, but he is the only character who is perfect for this kind of training. One wonders how successful it actually was. At the end of Oop, when Harry is stopped by Malfoy, it is Malfoy who lost his cool. Harry stayed calm and cold, remained in control of Malfoy, Crabbe and Goyle. The writing style used in this conversation reads almost like Snape talking in the occlumency lessons. The flow of words is very similar. When Snape arrived, in spite of Harry's hate for him, he still remained in control, answered politely, and handled himself much better than earlier confrontations. KJ From inkling108 at yahoo.com Sat Nov 6 12:20:03 2004 From: inkling108 at yahoo.com (inkling108) Date: Sat, 06 Nov 2004 12:20:03 -0000 Subject: Dobby house elf for Potters? (Was Re: Why were Harry's parents so rich?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117338 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "mimbeltonia" wrote: > > Could the Malfoy Estate be the original "Potter Estate", somehow > tricked or forced from James' parents by the Death Eater Malfoy > during the first WW?? The house elf went with the house for some > complex reason (maybe also the reason why Dobby can't tell Harry), > but James was able to save an important part of the fortune... > > What do you think??? > > Inkling now: Inspired idea, Mimbeltonia! Only if that's the case, Draco must not know about it. Otherwise he'd be throwing it up to Harry morning noon and night. Maybe "slippery" Lucius quietly pulled a fast one at the time of Harry's grandparents' death. Got the house on a legal technicality or something. Still you'd think it would be more widely known if that happened (excuse the rambling tone, it's early and I'm just thinking out loud) It's strange how little is said about Harry's grandparents. In OOTP, when Sirius mentions that he used to stay with them after he left his own family, Harry finally has a chance to find out about them from someone who knew them first hand -- and he doesn't even ask! Does this strike anyone else as very, very odd? Sorry is this has been discussed before, I can never keep up. Inkling, early on a Saturday morning... From hannahmarder at yahoo.co.uk Sat Nov 6 12:21:39 2004 From: hannahmarder at yahoo.co.uk (Hannah) Date: Sat, 06 Nov 2004 12:21:39 -0000 Subject: Draco's POV? (Was: What we find there [behind the door] )--SPOILERS!!! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117339 SSSusan wrote: > > > > 2) Draco's detour to visit daddy in Azkaban, perhaps? > > > > > > ***kitten: > > > secondly it would be to hard to do with the books being in Harry's > > > pov.... > > > > > > Siriusly Snapey Susan: > > We have seen JKR depart from this previously, though. The scene > > which comes to mind for me is Frank Bryce & the Riddles. > > > > > Carol: > True, but those chapters were at the beginning of the book, rather > like the use in SS/PS chapter 1 of Vernon Dursley's POV and an > objective (impersonal) narrator who couldn't enter *anybody's* mind in > the scene with Dumbledore, McGonagall and Hagrid. > I don't know!! It just seems to me that JKR, having established Harry > as her PoV character for the first five chapters (or second through > fifth if she uses an objective narrator to take us back in time to > Godric's Hollow in chapter one) is unlikely to switch to Draco as the PoV character for one chapter, or to use an impersonal narrator for a chapter devoted to him. The only way I can think of for us to hear his story is for Harry to witness it or overhear him talking about it. > > Anyone else have any ideas how JKR could present Draco's story without departing drastically from previously established narrative techniques? Hannah: No, I don't see how she could switch to Draco's POV without a drastic departure - but maybe she will do it anyway. A few things about this chapter title interest me (I'm sorry if they've already been pointed out, I've been working away and have missed loads of posts). Firstly, the use of 'Draco' instead of his surname. Why not call it 'Malfoy's Meander?' Harry never calls him Draco, so I wonder if this title is a sign that it concerns 'Draco' rather than Harry's perception of the character 'Malfoy.' Secondly, there was a chapter that JKR discarded where Draco meets Nott. I don't see how she could have done this from Harry's POV. I doubt this chapter is a rehashing of that scene, otherwise I'm sure she wouldn't have put it on her website. But it's interesting that she states she wanted to show how Draco behaved with someone that he didn't feel superior to. Is it a sign that there is more to Draco than meets the eye, and that she was trying to show another side to him? Before seeing this chapter title (a week after everyone else - why does she always wait until I'm busy to reveal something new?) I'd been sceptical about any chances of a redeemed Draco. But now I feel a bit more optimistic that maybe JKR is taking the character to new places. In book 5, Draco was marginalised, and he has played less and less of an important part throughout the 5 books, as more characters have been introduced and more things have been going on. Maybe in book 6 this is going to change, and Draco will be more important again, whether as a 'baddy' or a possible candidate for redemption. JKR has also said we'll be seeing a lot more of Narcissa. Considering the Malfoys' current position, I can't see many opportunities for her to encounter Harry. So perhaps our contact will be via Draco. I don't think that they'll have got back to school - or even as far as the train - by chapter 6, even if the book is shorter than OotP. OTOH, I also think that the idea of Harry overhearing a conversation/ following Draco in some public place (probably Diagon/ Knockturn alley) and finding out some sort of information is quite likely. Or could he dream it? I doubt he'll go into Draco's mind, but what about if LV is involved? I wish she'd just publish the book! Hannah Fanfic at www.schnoogle.com/authorLinks/Hannah_Marder/ From elsyee_h at yahoo.com Sat Nov 6 13:22:13 2004 From: elsyee_h at yahoo.com (Tammy) Date: Sat, 06 Nov 2004 13:22:13 -0000 Subject: Did the Potters know the prophecy? In-Reply-To: <20041106005305.41499.qmail@web52106.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117340 Empooress wrote: > Remember the bit about having defied Voldy three times > perhaps at the time of Harry's birth that had not yet > occured. And I would think that the Longbottoms also > had gone into hiding as well. I would think that both > sets of parents had been told about the prophecy. Come > to think of, I wonder how Voldy's followers knew where > to find the Longbottoms so soon after the attack. > While the canon does not give a specific time, it does > seem to indicate that it occured shortly after the > attack on the Potters, as the followers where tring to > find out where Voldy was, so that appears to me that > they did not know what had happened at Godic's Hollow. > Tammy replies: Actually it states in cannon that the attack on the Longbottoms happened "just when everyone thought they were safe" which seems to indicate that it happened after a decent period of time (I'm thinking a month or two). No one knew what happened to Voldemort if you recall, not even after it happened. That's why Bella & co. went to Frank and Alice, as aurors, if anyone would know then they would know (at least that's what the DEs would think). Thus if the Longbottoms had gone into hiding, they would have been out of hiding by then, as it was "safe". -Tammy From Zarleycat at aol.com Sat Nov 6 13:29:35 2004 From: Zarleycat at aol.com (kiricat2001) Date: Sat, 06 Nov 2004 13:29:35 -0000 Subject: The Power that LV Knows Not (was Ch. 30 Grawp) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117341 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Smythe, Boyd T {FLNA}" wrote: > > boyd: > So when book 7 is released, don't be surprised when a foursome of creatures > makes the difference, perhaps making way for Harry's last act. After all, it > was Harry that brought them all together in the first place! Marianne: Hmmm. I wonder if you might be on to something. There has been recent discussion (and probably threads back in the dim mists of time that I don't remember any more) about Harry as DD's tool or weapon for the destruction of Dumbledore. About how Harry always had needed some sort of intervention of an adult to accomplish whatever task is at hand in each of the 5 books. And there has also been some recent speculation that, at the end, Harry will come up a plan or a discovery that will aid in the defeat of Voldy and the DEs that will be totally his own, and may well be something so unexpected that none of the older, wiser wizards will have thought of it. JKR certainly seems to be heading in the direction of bringing these other beings more to the forefront. I suspect that she will more fully develop a goblin subplot in HBP. Then, we will have all of these beings in place for the final showdown in Book 7. Boyd: > One question: what does it mean that the MoM fountain did not include a > giant? Marianne: I'd say that in traditional wizard view, giants are beings that are not at all useful to wizards and that most wizards think of giants as no more than brutish beasts. Therefore, they are not seen as worthy of representation in the fountain. Goblins and elves perform a function for wizards, even if they are not as enraptured with wizards as wizards seem to believe. And centaurs certainly have an obvious intellect, even though they don't have a consistent role in providing any kind of service for wizards that I can remember. Maybe centaurs are represented because of their prophetic skills. Marianne From willsonkmom at msn.com Sat Nov 6 13:48:00 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Sat, 06 Nov 2004 13:48:00 -0000 Subject: Theo Nott In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117342 Carol wrote: > > We know that JKR has given Theo Nott a personality and a background > even though we've seen little of him so far, so it's a safe bet that > we'll see more of him in Book 6. I hope he doesn't get tossed back > into the story with no consideration of how he's spent what must have > been a terrible summer. Potioncat: "Draco's Detour" reminds me of the deleted chapter JKR talks about on her site. The one where Draco and Theo have a conversation. I've been wondering if an interaction between those two will be a part of the chapter. I'd forgotten that Theo will be 16 by summer or during the summer. I know 17 is "of age" but haven't I read somewhere that 16 year olds can rent and hold jobs? (In the RW at least) From hannahmarder at yahoo.co.uk Sat Nov 6 14:44:48 2004 From: hannahmarder at yahoo.co.uk (Hannah) Date: Sat, 06 Nov 2004 14:44:48 -0000 Subject: Why has DD never suggested Harry thank Snape? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117343 Lupinlore wrote: > I have been wondering about this for a while. Snape has saved > Harry's life, or tried to protect it, on at least three occassions we > know of (SS/PS, PoA, OOTP). Yet Dumbledore has never once suggested > to Harry that he should thank Snape for doing so. In fact, his > explanation in SS/PS, that Snape was discharging a duty to Harry's > father, pretty much guarantees that Harry won't see Snape is > needing/deserving thanks. > > Now, why would Dumbledore do this? I can think of two main reasons > off the top of my head, and they aren't mutually exclusive. Note > that I am discounting the possibility of an evil or overtly > manipulative Dumbledore: > > 1) Dumbledore tolerates Snape in part because he thinks that > students should learn to deal with difficult people. However, the > flip side of that is that he feels no obligation to shield Snape from > the inevitable backlash and difficulties his attitudes engender. > 2) The message he is sending Harry is simply fact. Snape really is > a selfish/hateful individual who opposes Voldemort for his own > reasons and helps Harry only because he is obligated to do so. Hannah: Apologies for the lateness of the reply, but this is one of my favourite topics and I couldn't resist responding to such a good post on it. DD not only didn't prompt Harry to thank Snape, but virtually guaranteed he wouldn't do so of his own accord. Why, why, why, why, why??? I agree completely with Lupinlore that DD subtly reinforces Harry's negative opinion of Snape. While saying that he is trustworthy and on the same side, and ought to be referred to as 'professor,' he never makes any real attempt to alter Harry's view of Snape. In that final scene of PS/SS, I always wonder what DD is covering up. When Harry asks about Snape and his relationship with James, DD gives him the story about how James saved Snape's life, adding the 'I rather think that's why he's worked so hard to protect you' line that seems to give Harry licence to dismiss all of that hard work without a word of gratitude. But how true is the line about Snape saving Harry to pay James back, so he could 'hate his memory in peace?' It's never seemed a very satisfactory explanation of Snape's behaviour to me. Especially as Snape continues to protect but openly dislike Harry in future books. No evidence of having discharged a duty and moved on. Snape's feelings about James are far to complicated to be explained away by a 'he was embarrassed when James saved him, but now he's saved James' son so it's all ok.' I think DD uses this to cover up something else, something he doesn't want Harry to know. He is very careful not to expand on James and Snape's school days (and we now know this may not have shown James in a very flattering light), but instead tells Harry about James saving Snape. Harry is interested to know this and, being not the most inquisitve of children, happily accepts the 'paying James back' theory. DD has thus diverted his attention away from any deeper and more unpleasant underlying issue. And we already know of a few things that complicate the story. So this all brings us back to Snape's motivations with regard to Harry. The way I see it is that he has two sets of conflicting feelings about the boy. Snape has never been interested in Harry as a real person. For him, I think, Harry is symbolic. He'd made up his mind about Harry long before he met him, and even when presented with evidence to the contrary, is unwavering in his opinion of him (eg, persistently stating Harry is arrogant when humility is one of Harry's best qualities). Snape hates (or strongly dislikes) Harry because of James. Harry looks like, and reminds him in other ways (whether justly so or not) of James. Snape cannot get over the bitterness and hatred he feels towards James, so he takes it out on Harry by being horrible to him. This is all pretty evident. But Snape goes out of his way to save Harry, and to save him personally. Can this really be explained just by saying he felt obliged to by the boy's dead father? Given Snape's feelings about the man, and that Snape believed James was partly responsible for the incident anyway so may never have felt obliged to him anyway, I find it unlikely. No, Snape may hate Harry because of James, but he saves him for some other reason, and DD does not want Harry to know it. And maybe he even thinks it is better for Snape and Harry not to get any friendlier, at least at that stage, just so Harry doesn't find it out. I reckon Lily comes into this somewhere. Not necessarily as the past object of Snape's affection, unrequited or otherwise, but I'm sure she has some kind of link with the man. Either that or it ties in to the mysterious reasons for Snape's defection from the DEs. Either way, we don't get the full story here by a long way. So why does DD tolerate Snape? Both of Lupinlore's theories are plausible. I'd prefer 1) to be the truth, but 2) is also quite possible. One thing I pick up on in the way DD (and MM) treat Snape, is a certain level of amusement, almost indulgence. They both knew Snape when he was Harry's age, and given their ages, that probably doesn't seem that long ago to them. I think DD sees Snape as a kind of protegy, who, one day, will come right, once he's learnt to master his feelings. Given JKR's comments, he's probably mistaken in this beleif. I don't think DD's attitude to Snape is that described in 2), but maybe he'd be correct if it was. Hannah, who suspects she stopped making sense a long time ago... Fanfic at www.schnoogle.com/authorLinks/Hannah_Marder/ From foxmoth at qnet.com Sat Nov 6 14:50:29 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Sat, 06 Nov 2004 14:50:29 -0000 Subject: Snape's ghastly behavior was broken potion In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117344 > Dan: > Well, there are many times in the books where Snape delivers ghastly throwaway lines, like the infamous "I see no difference." Now, aside from the implication in this that Rowling is, well, perhaps compromising us, when we chuckle, cringe or whatever at that line, in preparation for some projected so-called "moral" judgement she may hand down, sometime (though I personally doubt she will let us off that easy, reducing the books to some little package), the line has no other possible point than, well, getting back at the Know-It-All. < Pippin: I'm not so sure they're random throw-away lines. Once per book, Snape does (or appears to do) something so ghastly that RL teachers post to say "I'd get fired for that." SS/PS : the broomstick hex CoS: coaching Draco to produce the snake PoA: outing Lupin GoF: the tooth remark OOP: the potion smash Not only has there been no comeuppance as yet for any of these, our perspective keeps being shifted to make them look, if not okay, then at least not entirely gratuitous. PS/SS: wholly bogus. Snape was trying to save Harry, not kill him. CoS: Dumbledore and Snape couldn't really be sure Harry wasn't being possessed by the Heir, could they? In which case alerting the students to the possibility wasn't a bad idea. They manage it without making Harry think the teachers suspect him. Not bad. PoA: Fudge already knew that Lupin had been loose on the grounds when Snape made his "accidental" revelation. Now that we know about Umbridge, does anyone really think she would have let Lupin keep his job? She'd have made a public scandal, and it would have hurt all werewolves, not just Remus. GoF: "I see no difference" sounds different once we find out that ignoring hex damage is standard operating procedure, unless you catch the culprit wand-handed. Harry and Ron were punished, but for shouting at Snape, not for hexing Goyle. OOP: the evidence isn't all in yet, but I'm betting things will look different later The other thing all this outrageousness does is disguise the fact that slowly but surely, Snape *has* been adjusting his attitude toward Harry. IIRC, it's been quite a while since we heard the world "expelled." He actually manages to dredge up a word of encouragement or two during the occlumency lessons. There are no more insults about Harry's father after the pensieve incident, not even during the charade in Umbridge's office. I wonder if , despite what Dumbledore said, Snape finally has that off his chest? Pippin From foxmoth at qnet.com Sat Nov 6 15:07:58 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Sat, 06 Nov 2004 15:07:58 -0000 Subject: Why has DD never suggested Harry thank Snape? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117345 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Hannah" wrote: > > Lupinlore wrote: Yet Dumbledore has never once suggested to Harry that he should thank Snape for doing so. In fact, his explanation in SS/PS, that Snape was discharging a duty to Harry's father, pretty much guarantees that Harry won't see Snape is needing/deserving thanks. > > > > Now, why would Dumbledore do this? > Hannah: Apologies for the lateness of the reply, but this is one of my favourite topics and I couldn't resist responding to such a good post on it. DD not only didn't prompt Harry to thank Snape, but virtually guaranteed he wouldn't do so of his own accord. Pippin: I think all the explanations are good, but there's another one. Dumbledore wants Harry to feel that just like Snape, he's accepted for what he is. Harry needs this desperately, far more than he needs to feel "proper" gratitude toward Snape. It isn't so easy to change your feelings anyway, certainly not at going-on-twelve. Rather than feeling grateful to Snape, Harry would just have felt inadequate in Dumbledore's eyes for not feeling grateful. We saw how devastating that was to Harry at fifteen, when he thought his bad behavior had made Dumbledore desert him. Besides, Snape seems to be enough of a legilimens to tell when Harry is being sincere. Perfunctory thanks would just make things worse. Pippin From bob.oliver at cox.net Sat Nov 6 15:26:51 2004 From: bob.oliver at cox.net (lupinlore) Date: Sat, 06 Nov 2004 15:26:51 -0000 Subject: Occlumency: Relax or resist? (Was: CHAPTER DISCUSSION: Chapter 29, Career Advice In-Reply-To: <418C6385.2070609@telus.net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117346 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Kathryn Jones wrote: > > Lupinlore wrote: > > With this in mind, Snape was the most likely to be successful in teaching > Harry to develop instinctual and reliable reaction to the feel of > legilimency being performed on his mind. He did in fact learn to do > this. Snape made him feel threatened enough to defend. > > If you think it was painful and difficult for Harry, think of how Snape > must have felt at encouraging a student to face him with a wand and allow > the student to hex him, said student, perhaps containing some part of the > mind of Voldemort. Snape did not become angry with Harry for the stinging > hex, or using "protego". He became "infuriated" when Harry did not defend. > Snape might not be a nice person, but he is the only character who is > perfect for this kind of training. > And yet, Dumbledore says, "It was a mistake not to teach you myself." I'm inclined to take Dumbledore at his word, that he would have taught Harry himself had he not feared for Harry's safety, and that he feels Snape was the second best choice. Well, we can go round and round with this one forever. My own personal experience of both martial arts and rifle training was different than yours, so we'll just have to agree to disagree. Hopefully when the next book comes out Harry will have a different Occlumency teacher and we can see if Snape's method is universal or idiosyncratic to him. Lupinlore From foxmoth at qnet.com Sat Nov 6 15:50:25 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Sat, 06 Nov 2004 15:50:25 -0000 Subject: Occlumency: Relax or resist? (Was: CHAPTER DISCUSSION: Chapter 29, Career Ad In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117347 Kathryn: > > Snape might not be a nice person, but he is the only character who is perfect for this kind of training. << > > Lupinlore: > And yet, Dumbledore says, "It was a mistake not to teach you > myself." I'm inclined to take Dumbledore at his word, that he would have taught Harry himself had he not feared for Harry's safety, and that he feels Snape was the second best choice. > > Well, we can go round and round with this one forever. My own personal experience of both martial arts and rifle training was different than yours, so we'll just have to agree to disagree. Hopefully when the next book comes out Harry will have a different Occlumency teacher and we can see if Snape's method is universal or idiosyncratic to him.< Pippin: I think we've established that there are different educational philosophies and that Snape's method is used and accepted in the Real World, though some find it abhorrent and question its effectiveness. That being the case, the question for me is not whether this is idiosyncratic to Snape, because apparently it isn't. The question is whether he chose this method regardless of its chances of success because it would give him an excuse to attack Harry, or because it is the one he knows best and uses most effectively. We'd have to see him teaching occlumency to someone else to know that -- Draco, perhaps? Pippin From willsonkmom at msn.com Sat Nov 6 15:59:08 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Sat, 06 Nov 2004 15:59:08 -0000 Subject: Occlumency: Relax or resist? (Was: CHAPTER DISCUSSION: Chapter 29, Career Ad In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117348 >>>Pippin wrote: We'd have to see him teaching occlumency to someone else to know that -- Draco, perhaps? Potioncat: Or better yet, Theodore Nott. From jiggsvelasco at yahoo.com Sat Nov 6 15:00:30 2004 From: jiggsvelasco at yahoo.com (jp velasco) Date: Sat, 6 Nov 2004 07:00:30 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Harry, Hermione, Sirius, and the Dream, 2-way mirror In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041106150030.13257.qmail@web52909.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 117349 Pippin: > JKR has said the mirror wouldn't have been as useful as you > think...I'm afraid that if Sirius and James had them, Pettigrew had > one too, so that line of communication was probably covered. Tim: I suspect that if Pettigrew had one then Remus certainly would. If Remus had one I would think Sirus would have mentioned it. If Pettigrew does have one, then there is the possiblity of him using it to spy, and Sirius would not have given Harry the mirror at all I think. Jp here I don't think that Peter has a mirror... but Jo said (in her website) that the mirror will be useful in books 6 and 7. She did not elaborate but it struck me as odd when I was reading OotP when Harry forgot the mirror and had gone through all that trouble to talk to Sirius. From jiggsvelasco at yahoo.com Sat Nov 6 15:14:24 2004 From: jiggsvelasco at yahoo.com (jp velasco) Date: Sat, 6 Nov 2004 07:14:24 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Did the Potters know the prophecy? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041106151424.57988.qmail@web52906.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 117350 kate said In the middle of reading PoA (again), I began to wonder, did Lily and James know about the prophecy? Did DD ever tell them exactly what Trelawney said that night? jp velasco here I don't think that DD told anyone the contents of the prophecy. I think that the spy (maybe Snape) told DD that voldy was after the Potters before the prophecy happened maybe because that Voldy asked the Potters to join his Death Eaters they (Potters) refused. I think that the prophecy reenforced the need of DD to protect the Potters from Voldy. in OotP, Sirius (or maybe Lupin) said that the ideas of DD on the actions of Voldy is so shrewed that it turns out to be right and in the chapter that DD tells Harry the prophecy, DD said that voldy had chosen the Potters because of the "impurity" of blood, much like voldy himself. so I think that the prophecy just confirms the "spy" that Voldy is after the Potters. lucky for DD because the prophecy had put him and the order at an advantage against Voldy. From eggplant9998 at yahoo.com Sat Nov 6 16:12:20 2004 From: eggplant9998 at yahoo.com (eggplant9998) Date: Sat, 06 Nov 2004 16:12:20 -0000 Subject: Why has DD never suggested Snape thank Harry? (Was: Why has DD never suggested H In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117351 Lupinlore wrote: > Dumbledore has never once suggested > to Harry that he should thank Snape > for doing so [saving his life]. I believe this entire thread is misnamed so I changed it. At the time in question Harry had just saved the entire Wizarding world (including Snape) from a terrible fate; in fact although he had not yet reached his 13'Th birthday this was the second time he had done so. In spite of this Snape continues to treat Harry like dirt; thanking Snape under those circumstances would be condescending and grotesque. I seriously question Dumbledore's wisdom, if not sanity, in letting a borderline psychopath like Snape teach children, especially let him teach Harry, most especially let him teach Harry Occlumency. I believe Harry's failure to learn the subject and the resulting disaster were due to Snape's incompetent teaching methods. Everybody said that in order to learn Occlumency your mind needs to be as calm as possible, yet just before each lesion Snape made sure Harry was absolutely furious. I don't know if Snape did this consciously or if his hatred of Harry made him resist giving something as valuable as Occlumency to Harry and he did it subconsciously, but either way it's bad. Harry repeatedly said that Snape's lessons weakened his ability to resist Voldemort's attacks, everybody seems to ignore this but I think it's important. Eggplant From bboyminn at yahoo.com Sat Nov 6 17:51:45 2004 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Sat, 06 Nov 2004 17:51:45 -0000 Subject: Draco's POV? (Was: What we find there [behind the door] )--SPOILERS!!! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117352 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Hannah" wrote: > > SSSusan wrote: > > > > > 2) Draco's detour to visit daddy in Azkaban, perhaps? > > > > > Carol: > > ...edited... > > Anyone else have any ideas how JKR could present Draco's story > without departing drastically from previously established narrative > techniques? > Hannah: > No, I don't see how she could switch to Draco's POV without > a drastic departure - but maybe she will do it anyway. ...edited.. > > Secondly, there was a chapter that JKR discarded where Draco meets > Nott. > bboyminn: I would love to read that chapter both for the insight into Draco, but also for the insight into T.Nott. The only way he could have escaped Harry's notice for all that time they've been in school together is if Nott has left Harry alone; never had any conflict with him. At the moment, I would say the most interesting characters we are likely to meet in the new book that have already been introduced, are Theo Nott and Blaise Zabini. > Hannah continues: > > OTOH, I also think that the idea of Harry overhearing a > conversation/ following Draco in some public place (probably Diagon/ > Knockturn alley) and finding out some sort of information is quite > likely. Or could he dream it? I doubt he'll go into Draco's mind, > but what about if LV is involved? I wish she'd just publish the > book! > > Hannah bboyminn: I've always felt that the scene in which Draco meets Voldemort would be a very interesting scene. It would be the point at which Draco's Pureblood and Death Eater fantasies suddenly meet the harsh realities of the real world. I think Draco see his father as standing shoulder to shoulder with Voldemort, saving the world from unworthy mudblood/mixed-blood scum. So, I think the bowing, scraping, hem-of-robe kissing, and total subservience to Voldemort are going to come as a shock to poor old Draco. Given the dilemma of having to resolve point-of-view, I could see Harry viewing via Scar-Vision, that first meeting between Draco and Voldemort. Alternately, it could be that Draco and friends were so thoroughly messed up by being hit once again with multiple curses at the end of the book, that they end up in St. Mungo's Hospital. Some how Harry could discover this by having to visit the hospital. Another possibility that resolves POV, is Harry observing Draco skulking around somewhere. Harry & friends follow Draco while Draco sneaks of to the Forbiddne Forest, unauthorized visit to the village, or down Knockturn Alley. Perhaps Draco is meeting a DE to pass information about what's going on at school. Just a few thoughts. Steve/bboyminn (was bboy_mn) From EyeMelodius at hotmail.com Sat Nov 6 18:12:10 2004 From: EyeMelodius at hotmail.com (annunathradien) Date: Sat, 06 Nov 2004 18:12:10 -0000 Subject: Riddle's Birthday (was: The only one he ever feared?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117353 garybec wrote: > If the broken prophecies/spheres that we heard fragments of; > i.e.; at the Solstice...etc, were actually pertaining to the coming > of the Dark Lord, would Jo be so bold as to put a Happy Birthday > Voldy on her calendar for December 21st? I do think Riddle Jr's birthday falls somewhere around the Winter Solstice. Here's a possible clue... ****** GOF (Sch-HC), ch. 13, p. 201 "Born under - what, sorry?" said Harry. "Saturn, dear, the planet Saturn!" said Professor Trelawney, sound definitely irritated that he wasn't riveted by this news. "I was saying that Saturn was surely in a position of power in the heavens at the moment of your birth . . . Your dark hair . . . your mean stature . . . tragic losses so young in life . . . I think I am right in saying, my dear, that you were born in midwinter?" "No," said Harry, "I was born in July." ******* I think Trelawney was determining Tom Riddle's astrology here, not Harry's. A little clue possibly from JKR for us to determine when Tom was born exactly(and indications of his Sign). Harry, a sort of anti-Tom (carrying a chunk of Tom in him), was born in July, near midsummer. Tom, very likely near the opposite solstice/season, in or near midwinter. Tom could possibly be a Sagitarrius or a Capricorn. I'm leaning towards Capricorn. They're governed by Saturn and - depending on how much JKR plays with the atypical astrological traits - the sign is often associated with acute fear of death, seriousness, studiousness and ambition. Thus, Tom's birthday would fall in either late December (1926 or '27?) or early January (1927?). annunathradien From foxmoth at qnet.com Sat Nov 6 18:18:35 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Sat, 06 Nov 2004 18:18:35 -0000 Subject: Why has DD never suggested Snape thank Harry? (Was: Why has DD never suggest In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117354 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "eggplant9998" wrote: > > > Lupinlore wrote: > > > Dumbledore has never once suggested > > to Harry that he should thank Snape > > for doing so [saving his life]. > > I believe this entire thread is misnamed so I changed it. At the time in question Harry had just saved the entire Wizarding world (including Snape) from a terrible fate; in fact although he had not yet reached his 13'Th birthday this was the second time he had done so.< Eh? First year, Harry and his friends received the House Cup for their services and congratulations, via McGonagall, from Snape. Second year they got special awards for services to the school, which includes Snape, and fourth year Snape stood and drank in honor of Harry, or so we are given to understand. It was only some of those at the Slytherin table who we're told did not. And then in fifth year McGonagall says, " well, I think Potter and his friends ought to have fifty points apiece for alerting the world to the return of You-Know-Who! What say you, Professor Snape?" "What?" snapped Snape, though Harry knew he had heard perfectly well. "Oh--well--I suppose..." A shade perfunctory, but it's in there. Pippin From foxmoth at qnet.com Sat Nov 6 18:30:15 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Sat, 06 Nov 2004 18:30:15 -0000 Subject: Harry, Hermione, Sirius, and the Dream, 2-way mirror In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117355 > > Pippin: > > JKR has said the mirror wouldn't have been as useful as you > > think...I'm afraid that if Sirius and James had them, Pettigrew had one too, so that line of communication was probably covered.<< > > Tim Now: > > I suspect that if Pettigrew had one then Remus certainly would. If Remus had one I would think Sirus would have mentioned it. If Pettigrew does have one, then there is the possiblity of him using it to spy, and Sirius would not have given Harry the mirror at all I think.< Pippin: To correct the quote, JKR said the mirror "might not have helped as much as you think, but, on the other hand, will help more than you think." I wish I could think that Sirius wouldn't have given the mirror to Harry if he thought there was any possibility that Pettigrew might use it to spy, but Sirius was awfully given to discounting risks. The secrecy troubles me...Sirius acts like he knew the other Order members wouldn't approve if they found out about it, and that leads me to think he was glossing over the risk, as he so often did. We don't know that the mirror Sirius gave Harry was the one that had belonged to James. It could have been Remus's. I thought it was odd that Sirius didn't ask Harry why he didn't use the mirror instead when Harry got him on Umbridge's fire. Did he not want Remus to know that Harry had it? Pippin From bboyminn at yahoo.com Sat Nov 6 18:31:22 2004 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Sat, 06 Nov 2004 18:31:22 -0000 Subject: Snape's ghastly behavior was broken potion In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117356 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "pippin_999" wrote: > ...edited... > > The other thing all this outrageousness does is disguise the fact > that slowly but surely, Snape *has* been adjusting his attitude > toward Harry. IIRC, it's been quite a while since we heard the > world "expelled." He actually manages to dredge up a word of > encouragement or two during the occlumency lessons. There > are no more insults about Harry's father after the pensieve > incident, not even during the charade in Umbridge's office. I > wonder if , despite what Dumbledore said, Snape finally has that > off his chest? > > Pippin bboyminn: First, just because someone isn't nice, doesn't mean they aren't good. Like Sirius said, the world isn't divided into the good guys and Death Eaters; there are lots of shades of grey and ambiguity in between. Also, I've always felt that the long term story point of the Occlumency lessons was not to teach Harry Occlumency, but to give Harry and Snape some insight into each other. Insight that will start them on the path to a begrudging mutual respect. Harry said himself, that he never thought he would feel sorry for Snape, but he does. He does because he sees that Snape isn't nasty, but was made nasty by life circumstances, and that indeed there is some truth to the negative things Snape has said about Harry's father. At the moment, I think both of their minds are clouded by overly emotional responses to circumstances. But I fully expect Harry to realize that Snape is not to blame for Sirius's death, and Snape will realize the Harry is not a pampered prince nor is he James, and that it's not fair to judge Harry based on what happened between Snape and James. Don't look for them to be having tea and biscuits, or ale and chips while they swap tall tales any time soon. The change in their relationship will manifest itself from a distance and in a reduction of hostilities between them. Under the best of circumstances, Snape will never be a nice guy, but, before the series is over, I thoroughly expect him to prove beyond any shadow of a doubt that he is indeed a good guy. Just a thought. Steve/bboyminn (was bboy_mn) From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sat Nov 6 20:10:32 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sat, 06 Nov 2004 20:10:32 -0000 Subject: Eating Death: a ritual? (Was: Etymology of "Death Eater" ) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117357 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "John" wrote: > > > Carol responds: > > The idea of Death Eaters eating bottled death strikes me as > > some sort of evil parody of the communion service in which Catholics, Episcopalians, and various other Christian denominations (Lutherans?) symbolically eat the body and blood of Christ to share in his resurrection. Are the DEs eating Voldemort's death or their own? > > > Hi Carol > In RC the belief is in transubstanation, the wafer is the actual body and the wine the actual blood, after the priest has performed the ritual. > > Johnnie Carol: As an ex-Episcopalian, I forgot about that important liturgical difference. (JKR would be Anglican, wouldn't she?) Not sure how it relates to the Death Eaters, but I would guess that they'd eat death in some way that was both literal *and* symbolic, and the evil parody idea still holds, though I'm speculating, of course. What do you think? Carol From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sat Nov 6 20:18:40 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sat, 06 Nov 2004 20:18:40 -0000 Subject: forms of address In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117358 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "John" wrote: > > > Carol: > > Do any Brits on the list, preferably male, recognize a > > schoolboy pattern carried into adulthood here, for the > > adult male characters--and for McGonagall? > > Hi Carol > Frank Richards wrote a series of books called Billy Bunter. They portray the British school system for that era. > > Johnnie Carol: As I don't have access to the Billy Bunter books, can you tell me whether the boys refer to each other by last names, that is, whether McGonagall is using British schoolboy patterns for her era? Do the books reflect similar patterns to those used at Hogwarts? Note that Harry and Ron call their close (male) friends by first names and more distant acquaintances (or enemies) by last name. Draco and his friends are interested in families rather than individuals ("What's your surname?" he asks Harry in Madame Malkins' shop--but of course he's interrupted at that crucial point.) In other words, do these books help us to understand the patterns at Hogwarts? Which pattern is the norm, Harry's or Draco's? Is Draco following an older, aristocratic tradition outdated in the Muggle world? Carol From elfundeb at comcast.net Sat Nov 6 20:25:21 2004 From: elfundeb at comcast.net (Debbie) Date: Sat, 06 Nov 2004 20:25:21 -0000 Subject: The Riddles' Murders (WAS: The only one he ever feared? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117359 Katrina wrote: > > > What LV fears about DD is what he knows. I've heard it > postulated that when TR dropped "off the radar screen" after he > finished at Hogwarts, it was because of the triple AK murder in > Little Hangleton. The ministry had to know about this: talk about a > violation of the Statute of Secrecy! And since the victims were > named "Riddle," someone had to have been able to put 2+2 together.< > Kim: > It also hadn't occurred to me that the MoM would have been on the > look-out for the murderer of the 3 "Muggle" Riddles. Tom Jr. was > spotted in the vicinity, wasn't he, but was unknown to the Muggles in > the area, though you're right -- not to the "all-seeing eye" of the > MoM. The MoM would have known that AKs had been used even if the > cause of the deaths had stumped the Muggle police. So Tom hit the > road as a fugitive from justice. I don't believe that Tom Riddle disappeared *because* he was fleeing the scene of his parents' murders. Rather, he decided to leave to seek out what Dumbledore calls "the very worst of our kind" who could instruct him in the Dark Arts, but before he left he stopped off in Little Hangleton for the revenge murder of his parents. Perhaps this is a subtle difference, but the reason I think it's correct is that I don't believe the MoM was aware of the Riddles' murders. As Dumbledore states in GoF, ch. 33, the MoM largely ignores the Muggle newspapers. While the Riddles' murder was undoubtedly sensational news to the Little Hangletonians, it may have escaped the notice of wizards other than Dumbledore himself and those of like mind; most would have thought the Muggle press beneath their notice. And we, as readers, learn about the murders from JKR herself, as GoF begins with an omniscient narrator relating the story. Notably, the police investigation ceased only because they concluded they lacked evidence of murder (the coroner could not identify a cause of death) and not because they no longer believed Frank Bryce had killed them. The only argument that supports the notion that the MoM must have known about it is that if the Improper Use of Magic Office employs countrywide surveillance, Mafalda Hopkirk's predecessor should have picked up on it. But I doubt they keep track of very much, or they would've noticed Mundungus Fletcher disapparating at 4 Privet Drive at the beginning of OOP. Debbie From tim at marvinhold.com Sat Nov 6 22:44:30 2004 From: tim at marvinhold.com (Tim) Date: Sat, 06 Nov 2004 22:44:30 -0000 Subject: Harry, Hermione, Sirius, and the Dream, 2-way mirror In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117360 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "pippin_999" wrote: > > > > Tim Now: > > > > I suspect that if Pettigrew had one then Remus certainly > would. If Remus had one I would think Sirus would have > mentioned it. If Pettigrew does have one, then there is the > possiblity of him using it to spy, and Sirius would not have given > Harry the mirror at all I think.< > > Pippin: > To correct the quote, JKR said the mirror "might not have helped > as much as you think, but, on the other hand, will help more than > you think." I wish I could think that Sirius wouldn't have given the > mirror to Harry if he thought there was any possibility that > Pettigrew might use it to spy, but Sirius was awfully given to > discounting risks. The secrecy troubles me...Sirius acts like he > knew the other Order members wouldn't approve if they found > out about it, and that leads me to think he was glossing over the > risk, as he so often did. > I think the conflict between Sirius and Molly may a factor in Sirius's behavior. Molly feels Sirius is not a proper role model and would not like Siruis to have direct, uncontrolled access to Harry. Sirius may not trust Ron to keep the mirror secret from his Mother. > We don't know that the mirror Sirius gave Harry was the one that > had belonged to James. It could have been Remus's. I doubt it. Sirius and James were the core of the marauders. Their bond was first and tightest. They had the most in common. Sirius fled to the Potter's, not the Lupin's. Sirius was James' best man, not Peter, not Remus. However we really don't know. It is entirely possilbe that James' mirror was destroyed when he and Lily were murdered. >. I thought it > was odd that Sirius didn't ask Harry why he didn't use the mirror > instead when Harry got him on Umbridge's fire. Did he not want > Remus to know that Harry had it? > > Pippin Very odd indeed! Sirius' and Harry's behavior in this book drive me up the wall. Why didn't Sirius give Harry the mirror earlier and demostrate its use while both were at 12 Gimmauld Place? Why did Harry think the mirror was so dangerous to Sirius? I know the phrasing Sirius used, but still why did Harry take him so literally and seriously? Why didn't Sirius say to Harry, "Use my gift"? in Umbridge's fire? Tim From bboyminn at yahoo.com Sat Nov 6 23:08:02 2004 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Sat, 06 Nov 2004 23:08:02 -0000 Subject: The Riddles' Murders (WAS: The only one he ever feared? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117361 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Debbie" wrote: > > Katrina wrote: > > > > > What LV fears about DD is what he knows. I've heard it > > postulated that when TR dropped "off the radar screen" after he > > finished at Hogwarts, it was because of the triple AK murder in > > Little Hangleton. The ministry had to know about this: ... > > > Kim: > > > It also hadn't occurred to me that the MoM would have been on the > > look-out for the murderer of the 3 "Muggle" Riddles. Tom Jr. was > > spotted in the vicinity, wasn't he, but was unknown to the Muggles > > in the area, though you're right -- not to the "all-seeing eye" > > of the MoM. > Debbie: > > I don't believe that Tom Riddle disappeared *because* he was fleeing > the scene of his parents' murders. Rather, he decided to leave to > seek out what Dumbledore calls "the very worst of our kind" who > could instruct him in the Dark Arts, but before he left he stopped > off in Little Hangleton for the revenge murder of his parents. > ...edited... bboyminn: Unless I read it wrong, I think Tom murdered his parents in the summer between his 6th and 7th year at Hogwarts. Since he came back to school, it doesn't seem like anyone made any connnection to Tom and the death of the Riddles. Once he graduated, he sought out the Dark Arts as a source of power that other, weaker, people were unwilling to tap. Note Voldemort's philosophy, there is no good and evil, only power and those to weak to seek it. I think Tom was in the process of transforming himself into Voldemort, the self-proclaimed most power wizard in the world, champion of the pureblood cause, and the next supreme evil overlord of the universe. A wizard so powerful and ruthless that all would fear to speak his name. I often wondered if Tom collected the inheritance on his parents estate, and used that money to finance his transformation? > Debbie Continues: > > ...edited... > > And we, as readers, learn about the murders from JKR herself, as GoF > begins with an omniscient narrator relating the story. Notably, the > police investigation ceased only because they concluded they lacked > evidence of murder (the coroner could not identify a cause of death) > and not because they no longer believed Frank Bryce had killed them. > > The only argument that supports the notion that the MoM must have > known about it is that if the Improper Use of Magic Office employs > countrywide surveillance, Mafalda Hopkirk's predecessor should have > picked up on it. But I doubt they keep track of very much, or they > would've noticed Mundungus Fletcher disapparating at 4 Privet Drive > at the beginning of OOP. > > Debbie bboyminn: I don't think this was a murder that was on the Ministries radar screens. The Ministry may have somehow detected the presents of magic that night, but at least one witch was known to have lived in that town, so the present or occurance of magic would be relatively common. Admittedly, we don't know if any witches or wizards besides Tom mother ever lived in the area, but is seems that they are spread all over the country, so it's possible. But again, magic is happening all over the country as wizards travel around, it's only if the magic is done in the presents of muggles that it becomes a problem. I don't think we can us Harry and Privet Drive as an illustration to mirror magical monitoring in the rest of the world. Harry has always been very closely watched. Through his whole life at Privet Drive there was always the possiblility that rogue Death Eaters might attack him, and if Voldemort ever returned certainly he would want to settle that old score between himself and Harry. So, Privet Drive is watched with an exceptional degree of scrutiny. Yes, yes... I know that there are protections in place at Privet Drive to protect Harry, but we don't know to what degree the DE's know about those protections. I think the only thing that prevented a DE attack was that most of the DE's went back to normal lives claiming they were bewitched. They would be more interested in saving their own hides than in avenging Voldemort. Obviously, Bellatrix and company are the exception to this. They did attack the Longbottoms, but with the intention of finding Voldemort and bringing him back, not with avenging his vanquishing. In the Little Hangleton incident, finding three mysteriously dead bodies would not be a breach of that Statue of Secrecy. Only if Tom was caught in the act of casting a spell by muggles would the Statue come into play. Just a few thoughts. Steve/bboyminn (was bboy_mn) From luckdragon64 at yahoo.ca Sat Nov 6 23:11:22 2004 From: luckdragon64 at yahoo.ca (Bee Chase) Date: Sat, 6 Nov 2004 18:11:22 -0500 (EST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: An Awful Thought In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041106231122.4514.qmail@web52004.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 117362 Luckdragon now: SSSusan, well said! Half the fun of the series is seeing how far JKR's imagination can go. It just would not be the same if someone else finished it off. It is "her" story to tell. Snip: SSSusan: But isn't this a bit of an insult to JKR's writing? Even having boxes & boxes full of notes and a final chapter, wouldn't it take some *talent* to bring it all together to the standard we're used to? Maybe I wasn't clear in what I said previously. I wasn't meaning we need JKR *just* to tie up loose ends, nor that I expected her to tie up *all*of them, but rather that to make it all work at the level we expect *and* to tie up lots of the loose ends, we need her. I'm not saying no one else could manage it, but the original statement sounded to me as if that person thought it would be no big deal to pick up the pieces & complete the series. Well, I guess I give JKR more credit than that. There may be notes and outlines, but the connections & vision are in her head. You mentioned potential new characters, too. Since no one besides JKR would have "met" these characters, how could anyone else be sure about fleshing them out? It might be lots of fun for people to make their own attempts at it, but, for me, I believe the only way we'll get a proper finish is if JKR herself issues it. IMHO, of course. Siriusly Snapey Susan 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 --------------------------------- 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 Sat Nov 6 23:16:11 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Sat, 06 Nov 2004 23:16:11 -0000 Subject: Why has DD never suggested Snape thank Harry? (Was: Why has DD never suggested H In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117363 Eggplant: > I believe this entire thread is misnamed so I changed it. At the > time in question Harry had just saved the entire Wizarding world > (including Snape) from a terrible fate; in fact although he had not > yet reached his 13'Th birthday this was the second time he had done > so. In spite of this Snape continues to treat Harry like dirt; > thanking Snape under those circumstances would be condescending and > grotesque. > Alla: Oh, of course I agree, but still having Harry thank Snape will be fun if only for the reason that than we will be absolutely sure that no amount of good will from Harry will change anything int heir relationship. Still, right now we cannot be absolutely sure, me thinks? What if Snape indeed craves Harry's gratefullness? I don't think it will be that condescending, because even though Harry saved WW numerous times, at least once Snape did save his life. I do not fault Harry for that - he was eleven year old boy and Dumbledore added fire, but still "thank you " would be nice. Eggplant: > I seriously question Dumbledore's wisdom, if not sanity, in letting > a borderline psychopath like Snape teach children, especially let > him teach Harry, most especially let him teach Harry Occlumency. I > believe Harry's failure to learn the subject and the resulting > disaster were due to Snape's incompetent teaching methods. Alla: Agreed. Pippin: > Eh? First year, Harry and his friends received the House Cup for > their services and congratulations, via McGonagall, from Snape. > Second year they got special awards for services to the school, > which includes Snape, and fourth year Snape stood and drank in > honor of Harry, or so we are given to understand. It was only > some of those at the Slytherin table who we're told did not. Alla: Sorry, Pippin, but IMO only one of the examples you gave is somehow counts as Snape thanking Harry. I do not believe that House Cup and awards for special services to school, especially House Cup requires good feelings of all teachers to be attached to it. It is quite reasonable, IMO to assume that Snape was not in congratulatory mood at all. Could you please give me a quote from PS/SS when he specifically conratulated Harry and Co for helping Gryffindor to receive House Cup? I'll admit it is possible that award for special services is given after all teaching staff makes a decision, but it is equally possible that it is only up to Dumbledore, right? In this case, of course Snape has to swallow the bitter pill, no matter how unhappy he is. If he indeed drank to Harry in GoF, it counts for something, since nobody was coerced to stand up, but again we did not see it Pippin: > And then in fifth year McGonagall says, " well, I think Potter and > his friends ought to have fifty points apiece for alerting the world > to the return of You-Know-Who! What say you, Professor > Snape?" > > "What?" snapped Snape, though Harry knew he had heard > perfectly well. "Oh--well--I suppose..." > > A shade perfunctory, but it's in there. Alla: It is different from what Snape usually does when Gryffindor gets points, but congratulations? I am not so sure. From gbannister10 at aol.com Sat Nov 6 23:23:14 2004 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Sat, 06 Nov 2004 23:23:14 -0000 Subject: forms of address In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117364 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" wrote: Carol: > As I don't have access to the Billy Bunter books, can you tell me > whether the boys refer to each other by last names, that is, whether > McGonagall is using British schoolboy patterns for her era? Do the > books reflect similar patterns to those used at Hogwarts? Geoff: I was never a Billy Bunter (The Fat Owl of the Remove) fan but I did glance at the books years ago and I'm pretty certain they use surnames. Geoff http://www.aspectsofexmoor.com From willsonkmom at msn.com Sat Nov 6 23:35:29 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Sat, 06 Nov 2004 23:35:29 -0000 Subject: Unreliable narrator (Was: Snape's stalling) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117365 -snipping Pippin's post (sorry) > > Neri: > I think the part that you don't follow is that I'm not talking about > "a reader". I'm talking about particular kinds of readers. To use your > terminology, I'm talking about the "conspiracy theorist" reader and > the "anti-conspiracy theorist" reader. > > The "anti-conspiracy theorist" reader believes that distrust has its > limits. There are some things in the text that are just plain true and > you have to trust them. Some anti-conspiracy theorists (probably most > of them, certainly myself) believe that Lupin is obviously a good > person. Therefore anything that makes him appear not good has some > explanation (usually not a flint. It could be a flaw or a mistake of > Lupin that makes him more human, but not ESE). You can of course > disagree with such a reader, but at least he is consistent. He does > not claim to be what he is not. > > The "conspiracy theorist" reader, in contrast, claims to use > "subversive reading" and distrust anything, especially things that > appear to be certain. His/her motto is "things are not necessarily > what they appear to be". For example, you have often justified > ESE!Lupin by saying that he is presented as such a nice person and > above any suspicion, therefore he must be the traitor. Now, since > Snape usually appears to be a bad person, the conspiracy theorists > saying that he is actually the hero seems like proper "subversive > reading". But then we arrive at the end of OotP, and Snape appears at > least as an OK guy. The great DD assures us Snape did everything he > should have done to prevent the MoM battle. The narrator clearly tells > us (I think you have recently quote this yourself) that Harry blames > Snape only to relieve his own guilt. Superficially, Snape really > appears to have done things right here. But then, a bit of subversive > reading discovers a 5 hrs hole in the plot, which Harry DIDN'T notice, > which makes OK-guy!Snape look very suspicious, and which DD appears to > be covering but doesn't deny outright. What should a REAL conspiracy > theorist do? He/she should immediately try to get to the bottom of > this and find out who is the ESE here, or at least who is the puppet > master, right? So how come all the conspiracy theorists either lose > interest, or try to save Snape's honor by any means including assuming > a flint? It seems that they are inconsistent in their own doctrine. > One would suspect that they are actually more of Snape apologists than > real conspiracy theorists. > > I hope I've managed to clarify my meaning. > Potioncat: Well, I'm jumping in kind of late here. I've read up and down this thread and I'm sorry my computer was down while this was fresh and new. (And, I'm in over my head as well...do you like my sea-serpent floatation devise?) Conspiracy...anticonspiracy...subversive reading. I'm not sure where I fit in, but I'll toss this out. We've learned a few things over the past few books. Not everything a character says is always true. The character may be telling the truth as they know it, but they may be mistaken. Not everything we see is correct. Mad-eye Moody did not turn Draco into a ferret for attacking Potter from behind. It was Barty Crouch who turned Draco into a ferret and he did it because.....? Conversations that we overhear don't always mean what we think they do.(Lupin and Snape discussing the map) So taking whatever topic you choose, you have to look at which character is saying what to determine what you believe. Sort of like real life. Hagrid is a good guy. He says Snape's ok. He's a Hogwarts teacher! (Paraphrased from SS...but if this is movie contamination I'm going to really iron my hands) Well, Hagrid may mean that, but if his reason for trusting Snape is that Snape is a Hogwarts teacher, I'm going to reserve judgement. That just isn't good enough. We've seen too many untrustworhty teachers for that to work. Hagrid is a nice guy, pretty simple minded in lots of ways, so I'll look at anything he says very carefully. Harry is ok, but we know he makes mistakes. He trusted Crouch!Moody (didn't we all!) He already dislikes Snape and for very good reasons, and he usually attributes the worst possible motives for anything Snape does. That would be OK, except we've seen cases where Snape is doing something for some another reason. I recently re-read the section where Harry discovers Snape is brewing a potion for Lupin. Harry thinks Snape's poisoning Lupin and Snape's behavior seems to confirm it. Reading that section after the book has been read, and you see it differently. So while I trust Harry, I know his interpretation isn't always correct. It's fair for me to look at his opinion of others very carefully. Dumbledore says Snape is OK. Well, I'm sort of relying on this. DD is supposed to be trustworthy...except that we know he doesn't always tell exactly the truth, or perhaps, not all of the truth. So there are times I think DD trusts Snape, but shouldn't. And there are times I think he trusts Snape to betray him. And there are times I think he knows and is correct and all is right with the world... or will be. But for the moment, Snape seems to be one of the good guys. I remember when the time line for the MoM battle was first going on, some of us raised the flint flag or at least the JKR math flag. I think we were justified at the time.(and may still be) But a lot of reasearch went into sunset, sunrise, this fact,that fact...and we most likely have a reasonable time line. On the other hand if we ever ask her, JKR may say, "Oh my, I just intended a few hours and never would have had the time to do all that research!" (I've seen reports on this list showing that the night sky as Harry saw it on OWLs doesn't fit realtiy. That's OK, she was writing for a literary purpose, not a scientific purpose.) My point being, if any of us want to figure out what a particular scene is telling us, we have to use tools and things we know to work it out. And that includes whether a particular character is reliable in this particular time and what we think JKR was really trying to say. And back to whether Snape did or did not stall, Neri, I think you have some execellent points, and I don't think you're crazy for raising them. I just don't happen to agree with them. But if it later turns out that he was stalling and it fits in with the plot line that we were fooled, I'll be the first to ring out "Wow! Neri was right!" Potioncat From annegirl11 at juno.com Sat Nov 6 23:38:23 2004 From: annegirl11 at juno.com (annegirl11 at juno.com) Date: Sat, 6 Nov 2004 18:38:23 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Quills (was Re: Hogwarts Uniform with Link - OT) Message-ID: <20041106.184146.480.1.annegirl11@juno.com> No: HPFGUIDX 117366 Mibletonia said: > However, I wonder, are the wizards sticking to 1700-century > technology (or sometimes even older) because their version of it has > been so much approved by magic that the newer muggle technology is > not really better? Here's my totally unsupported fanwank: How often do we hear of people actually dipping the quill in a pot of ink? It seems like they carry these around moreso than use them; maybe the quill just needs to be *near* the ink to magically tranferit to the quill. And maybe the magic doesn't stop there. (Here's where I go into fantasy land and indulge my writing impliment obcession.) We know of sugar quills, quik quills, and I think a few more but I can't remember if they're canon. Maybe ordinary student quills have editing functions; strike-through deletes, circling copy/pastes, etc. (Maybe they're semi-sentient and are in fact better than frickin annoying MS Word.) We never hear of parchment notebooks, either; maybe the kids carry around *one* roll of parchment all day, and their notes get magically transferred to a huge roll of parchment they keep in their rooms and only use for studying. (Can't you just imagine Hermione having her note rolls obcessively organized and under an anti-copying/theft charm, while Ron looses his under his bed by the second week and has to tear the room apart before midterms and finals?) If Muggles have those goofy computer pens, and that's just stupid rote computer chips, then I have no doubt that the magic that came up with the semi-sentient Marauder's Map can have some pretty decent magic office supplies. (That's a Staples I'd drop a small fortune in! Moreso than I usually do!) Plus, I have no doubt that the Marauders didn't pass notes the old-fashioned way. ("Dammit, Padfoot! Stop writing obscene jokes on my notes!") Maybe we just don't hear about it because 1) students aren't allowed/don't know how to use the magic because of cheating and whatnot; 2) It's so commonplace that it's not worth mentioning 3) I'm talking out my ass. Aura ~*~ "What he didn't like about heroes was that they were usually suicidally gloomy when sober and homicidally insane when drunk." - Discword http://archive.skyehawke.com/authors.php?no=606 From staceymateo at gmail.com Sat Nov 6 20:35:47 2004 From: staceymateo at gmail.com (staceymateo) Date: Sat, 06 Nov 2004 20:35:47 -0000 Subject: The only one he ever feared? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117367 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "ginnysthe1" wrote: > Lately (like > the last few days) I've been spending time conjecturing to myself on > the details of TR's birth and childhood, the days before he came to > Hogwarts to study as a wizard. How was he informed that he was > eligible to study there? He was in a Muggle orphanage, wasn't he? > Who, in a Muggle orphanage, would have received the owl mail from > Hogwarts and given it to him? > > Stacey here: Given how Harry was first contacted in PS/SS for his first few Hogwarts letters, the letters were found with the regular post. 1st letter - Vernon sent Harry to get the mail from the mail slot, and Harry noticed a letter in emerald-green ink addressed to him (not a direct quote as I don't have the book here at work with me). Once Vernon took the letter away from Harry, the next few letters continued to arrived via the mail slot until Vernon nailed it shut and the letters had to arrive by more unique ways (in the eggs is still my favorite). I would guess, since so much time was given to the beginning of PS/SS with this scenario, it would be safe to assume TR may have been contacted the same way (Without all the Vernon- influenced fun). Receiving the letter through the regular post would be a way to not raise awareness of the WW in almost purely Muggle areas. Arrival through the post would not involve anyone at the orphanage receiving owl mail. I have several random thoughts on how he was informed he was a wizard, but fanfiction and canon are getting a little jumbled in my mind. At anytime do any of the Muggleborns (Hermione, Justin, Colin etc.) mention being contacted by a member of the Hogwarts staff? Fanfiction refers to this quite a bit, but I cannot clearly recall if canon does as well. Stacey From kelsey_dangelo at yahoo.com Sun Nov 7 05:36:13 2004 From: kelsey_dangelo at yahoo.com (Kelsey Dangelo) Date: Sat, 6 Nov 2004 21:36:13 -0800 (PST) Subject: The only one he ever feared? / TR's past In-Reply-To: <1099726647.82451.24470.m21@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <20041107053613.50351.qmail@web53106.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 117368 Kim had written: How did TR find out that he was the last heir of Slytherin? His father didn't tell him. Did his mother know and leave some sort of message for him before she died? Lately (like the last few days) I've been spending time conjecturing to myself on the details of TR's birth and childhood, the days before he came to Hogwarts to study as a wizard. How was he informed that he was eligible to study there? He was in a Muggle orphanage, wasn't he? Who, in a Muggle orphanage, would have received the owl mail from Hogwarts and given it to him? Then I started thinking about his confrontation with his father and grandparents at the house in Little Hangleton when he was 16: How did he know who these people were if he'd never met them before? What did he say to them before he AK'd them? Or did he just sneak up on them and go "kabam!"? Am I missing something? Kelsey here: Hi, Kim! I completely share your fascination with young Tom Riddle (I guess he fascinates me as the most human-view we get of Voldemort, and his frightening parallels with our dear Harry). I'm also very interested in Tom's mother, and so want to learn more about her. For your first question ("how did Tom know his mother was the heir of Slytherin?"), it could simply be that her name was Sally Slytherin. That might be a clue to Tom's heritage. If not, he may have released some magic (a door or a certain Chamber of Secrets) upon arriving at Hogwarts, alerting him to his heritage. Tom is considered very intelligent, but I suspect that (unlike oblivious!Harry) he wasn't content to sit back and know nothing about his parentage and past. Since he's so obsessed with "blood" status, I bet he hit the genealogical archives. As for finding his dad, he might have just thumbed through the local Muggle-telephone book, since he knew his father's name. I'm not sure how many Tom Marvolo Riddles bought the farm before he hit on the right family, but it could have worked :) I really like how you bring up how very chilling it is that a 16-year-old kid (who resembles Harry) went into the house of his father and grandparents and just zapped them. They all died with looks of fright on their faces, so I bet he may have put on a bit of a show for them. One of the great pleasures of reading is that we can never know the tone of voice of a character or how exactly they meant something. I got this impression that TR is angry at his mother for giving him his Muggle-father's name, but I could "hear" a hint of anger on her behalf because she loved a Muggle who snubbed and left her. I just feel like he carried out revenge on his father for abandoning his mother and him. I get an impression that Ms. Slytherin didn't marry Mr. Riddle, but that he abandoned his witch girlfriend when she was pregnant, and that she never got over her love for Mr. Riddle, and named her son after him. I have this feeling/theory that she was (despite her Slytherin heritage) good and met a tragic end, leaving her son to be bitter, angry, and evil. Kelsey, who would love to read a romantic-tragedy entitled "The Heir of Slytherin and The Muggle Snob" __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com From kelsey_dangelo at yahoo.com Sun Nov 7 05:54:09 2004 From: kelsey_dangelo at yahoo.com (Kelsey Dangelo) Date: Sat, 6 Nov 2004 21:54:09 -0800 (PST) Subject: Clean Harry/Dirty Harry In-Reply-To: <1099726647.82451.24470.m21@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <20041107055409.19033.qmail@web53108.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 117369 Carol: So the end justifies the means? Isn't that the Slytherin ethic: "Those cunning folk use any means to achieve their ends"? Not to be trite, but surely the path to hell is paved with good intentions. Stealing is still stealing, even if you're Robin Hood. Also it wasn't really up to Harry and his friends to find out who the Heir of Slytherin was, nor did they accomplish much (except establishing Draco's innocence) by making a dangerous potion (look at what happened to Hermione) with stolen ingredients. They merely (re)established themselves as rule-breaking troublemakers in Snape's eyes. Kelsey's reply: I agree that "the road to hell is paved with good intentions" (in fact, I think I mentioned that in a post). That is why "the ends justifies the means" is not a good code for conduct in all cases. I think that the end justifies the means when someone isn't doing it for their own selfish reasons, but for the sake of good. In the case of stealing from Snape to discover the heir of Slytherin, who is hurt (besides Snape's pride)? The school is rich, won't miss a few potions. I think its ok to break rules (stealing and lying), as long as no one is seriously hurt and it's for good intentions. HHR weren't stealing the potions to make themselves school heroes or to poison Draco (who they thought was the heir); they wanted to find out who was the heir. Now, on the Slytherin ethic. Not all Slytherins are evil, and their cunning and ambitious nature isn't evil by itself. An ambitious nature can be dangerous (hence why a lot of them use their talents for money and wealth and power), but ambition and cunning can be used in a good way. For instance, it is ambitious to try to save Ginny from Tom Riddle in the Chamber of Secrets. Harry has some Slytherin qualities, as expressed by the Sorting Hat, but he chooses to use them for good, not to hurt people, but to do good. Kelsey, who thinks that Prince John and the Sheriff of Nottingham could afford to loose a bit of money to feed the starving people. One of her best friends is a Slytherin. __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com From shallowdwell at yahoo.com Sun Nov 7 01:08:53 2004 From: shallowdwell at yahoo.com (shallowdwell) Date: Sun, 07 Nov 2004 01:08:53 -0000 Subject: Draco's POV? (Was: What we find there [behind the door] )--SPOILERS!!! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117370 Thisline of speculation is endlessly fascinating to me, and the ideas for what it could be about are getting more creative and interesting. > > Hannah: > > No, I don't see how she could switch to Draco's POV without > > a drastic departure - but maybe she will do it anyway. ...edited.. > > > > Secondly, there was a chapter that JKR discarded where Draco meets > > Nott. > > > > bboyminn: > > I would love to read that chapter both for the insight into Draco, but > also for the insight into T.Nott. The only way he could have escaped > Harry's notice for all that time they've been in school together is if > Nott has left Harry alone; never had any conflict with him. I'd really appreciate meeting Slytherins besides those on Draco's "gang"-- including Pansy Parkinson. I'd just love to see a little more variety in their characters and perspectives and approaches. The one thing we know about dear Theo from before book 5 is that he doesn't say or do anything memorable to Harry. I'm glad for the small glimpses of information on him from JKR's website, and am also curious how he manages with his Dad unavailable during the summer. Isn't it possible that Nott could get special permission to spend the summer at Hogwarts? After all, even Tom Riddle (it appears) was only rejected for this permission due to the Chamber of Secrets Crisis in his day. (I wonder if framing Hagrid gave him access to this privilege?) Perhaps it is not that unusual for Hogwarts students to spend the summer on the grounds. > > Hannah continues: > > > > OTOH, I also think that the idea of Harry overhearing a > > conversation/ following Draco in some public place (probably Diagon/ > > Knockturn alley) and finding out some sort of information is quite > > likely. Or could he dream it? I doubt he'll go into Draco's mind, > > but what about if LV is involved? A view of Draco from LV's point of view would fit the bill, and also offers the advantage of giving Harry some insight into Draco's vulnerability. Not to mention possibly some ammunition against the same when he gets really obnoxious. :) However, I rather hope that Harry is going to give occlumency another shot, perhaps with Dumbledore's help this time. Or perhaps DD will find a DADA teacher who is also an occlumens. Because obviously this flitting around in Voldemort's head has some major downsides. On the other hand, getting out of this habit and learning to shut Voldie out will not likely get any easier. If only because it is such a handy way for JKR to tease us with just enough information. > bboyminn: > Alternately, it could be that Draco and friends were so thoroughly > messed up by being hit once again with multiple curses at the end of > the book, that they end up in St. Mungo's Hospital. Some how Harry > could discover this by having to visit the hospital. Oh, I like this idea. There are a few people in that hospital I wouldn't mind seeing more of, including the Longbottoms, and even Lockhart (he's sooo funny!) And again, seeing the vulnerability that the Slytherins (even Death Eaters) suffer from casualties in this war. Sobering, though, to realize the vulnerabilities that Harry's dear ones are exposed to now that Voldemort has no further benefit from secrecy. I dread finding out who could be hospitalized by chapter 6. > Another possibility that resolves POV, is Harry observing Draco > skulking around somewhere. Harry & friends follow Draco while Draco > sneaks of to the Forbiddne Forest, unauthorized visit to the village, > or down Knockturn Alley. Perhaps Draco is meeting a DE to pass > information about what's going on at school. More food for thought. Might Narcissa be with him? I'm looking forward to seeing more of Narcissa this book. I wonder about that smell under her nose. And if there might be something more to Draco's sensitivity to that subject One thing I've wondered is how students about to come of age learn to apparate. I remember driver's ed courses in highschool, and since apparition is described as difficult, and similarly requires an age limit and passing a test, perhaps there is a similar extracurricular course available to kids of the right age. Of course, it would be silly to do that at Hogwarts, where you can't apparate. But maybe in town? Or maybe its sponsored by the ministry of magic, with lessons to be held in a central, non-Hogwarts location. Perhaps young wizards and witches have to pick up their apparator's manual or application or the equivalent of a learner's permit before the Hogwarts term begins, and Harry could run into Narcissa and Draco then. And Draco, being something of a show-off, might demonstrate his aptitude for apparating, much as he flaunted his flying in book 1, to taunt Harry. Wouldn't a Draco splinching be an amusing "detour"? Here's hoping for still more interesting guesses. Andrea From jlnbtr at yahoo.com Sun Nov 7 01:47:18 2004 From: jlnbtr at yahoo.com (Juli) Date: Sat, 6 Nov 2004 17:47:18 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Harry's questions about his parents (was Harry, Hermione, Sirius, and the Dream, 2-way mirror) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041107014718.78398.qmail@web53106.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 117371 Pippin wrote: > > >. I thought it > > was odd that Sirius didn't ask Harry why he didn't > use the mirror > > instead when Harry got him on Umbridge's fire. Did > he not want > > Remus to know that Harry had it? Tim wrote: > Very odd indeed! Sirius' and Harry's behavior in > this book drive me up the wall. Why didn't > Sirius give Harry the mirror earlier and demostrate > its use while both were at 12 > Gimmauld Place? Why did Harry think the mirror was > so dangerous to Sirius? I know the > phrasing Sirius used, but still why did Harry take > him so literally and seriously? Why didn't > Sirius say to Harry, "Use my gift"? in Umbridge's > fire? I think we would all have liked it if Harry had used the mirror, but things don't always turn out how we want to. Siruis and Harry act like a couple of 10 year-olds, they love each other, they want to spend some time together but neither one says a thing, they just don't talk, maybe we didn't see every conversation between them while at GP, but they didn't talk much, they seemed to talked much while at Hogwarts. Why is that? During Christmas at GP Harry wanted to tell Sirius not to worry that it was OK getting oclumency lessons with Snape, but he didn't he found plenty of time to talk to Ron and Hermione, but not 5 minutes to talk to his godfather. It just bugs me, why didn't they talked? If I was Harry I would have gotten as much information as possible about my parents and my grand-parents, but he didn't. I don't think he even knows his grand-parents name. He's never asked anyone were his money came from. Nothing, he doesn't seem to want to know anything at all. Over the first 5 books he's met people who knew their parents but he never asls them much more than You knew my parents? I'm thinking about Remus, Harry found out he was a friend of James' and he didn't ask him a single thing about his dad. Then he meets Sirius, his dad's best friend and again not a sinlge question. At the end of PoA Dumbledore told him he knew his dad pretty well, both at Hogwarts and after, and again no questions. He trusts DD, he knows he wouldn't make him feel silly or stupid, then why why doesn't he wants to learn more about his parents. Yet everytime he hears someone talk about his mom & dad he gets excited. Hagrid gave him a photo album full of pictures of his parents, he saw it and then put it in the bottom of his trunk. He never takes it out to take a look, nor does he have any picture on his night-table. I found all this very unusual. Juli, wondering if anyone else thinks this is weird From beatnik24601 at yahoo.com Sun Nov 7 06:53:57 2004 From: beatnik24601 at yahoo.com (beatnik24601) Date: Sun, 07 Nov 2004 06:53:57 -0000 Subject: Theo Nott In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117372 Carol pondered: Has anyone given thought to the question of who's taking care of Theo now? Would a sixteen-year-old motherless boy whose father is in Azkaban (or St. Mungo's) be living on his own? To which i further pondered: Sorry, quick question, where does it say Nott is motherless? Is it on JK's website. Well, anyway, assuming that he is I would think he would live with relatives, he must have a lot to choose from, if he's a pureblood. It would be interesting to see him live with the Malfoys, but I don't think so. I don't think we're going to see the scene between Draco and Theo that JKR talks about on her website, much to my dismay, because it seems she wouldn't have made it public, otherwise. I tend to agree that Nott will have a larger role to play. He could be a Slytherin that has a chance of connecting with the other houses, particularly Harry, after all they both can see Thestrals, right? Beatnik From nkafkafi at yahoo.com Sun Nov 7 07:48:49 2004 From: nkafkafi at yahoo.com (nkafkafi) Date: Sun, 07 Nov 2004 07:48:49 -0000 Subject: Unreliable narrator (Was: Snape's stalling) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117373 > Potioncat: > > Conspiracy...anticonspiracy...subversive reading. I'm not sure > where I fit in Neri: I'm pretty sure you are an anti-conspiracy reader, Potioncat, like 99% of us (including some who won't admit it ;-) ). We anti-conspiracy readers know that the books are full of conspiracy, of course, but we also know that conspiracy has its limits, and sometimes you just have to trust a character. I trust Lupin. You trust Snape. Actually I trust Snape too, although I have no doubt he hates Harry with all his heart and enjoys hurting him, but I trust that DD's trust in him will be justified in the end. And I also trust DD not to be a ruthless puppet master. Even the best characters are somewhat flawed, and they make mistakes now and then, and JKR makes mistakes to. This is why it is easy to cast suspicion on any character. Lupin acts suspiciously when (to take a single example out of several) he forgets to take his potion in the night of the Shrieking Shack night. Sirius acts suspiciously by trying to kill Peter, when Peter is the only one who can prove Sirius' innocence. Snape does suspicious things all the time, of course, but usually he is so suspicious anyway that we are sure it's all red herrings. But in the end of OotP, DD tells us that Snape did everything ok, and this is exactly why the timeline makes Snape look really suspicious here. It is of course impossible to disprove all these suspicions now, unless JKR explicitly denies them in her website, and even then it is not always enough for some readers ;-). Therefore, we anti-conspiracy readers should be clear about our position. You simply trust Snape. I simply trust Lupin (and also Snape). No shame in it. There are very good chances we are right. Until now, JKR had never let us become really attached to a character and then told us he is ESE. She has no need to resort to such lowly means, when she can get much grander effects by using magical devices. In CoS it turns out that the most innocent and less suspicious person, ickle firstie Ginny Weasley, was the one who dunnit. Of course, she didn't know what she was doing at the time. In the next two books it might be Ron or Hermione or Hagrid or Dumbledore. Why not? We have the Imperius curse, we have metamorphmagi who can assume the shape of any person. Who needs ESEs? Neri From gbannister10 at aol.com Sun Nov 7 07:48:10 2004 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Sun, 07 Nov 2004 07:48:10 -0000 Subject: The only one he ever feared? / TR's past In-Reply-To: <20041107053613.50351.qmail@web53106.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117374 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Kelsey Dangelo wrote: Kim: > How did TR find out that he was the > last heir of Slytherin? His father didn't tell him. > Did his mother know and leave some sort of message for > him before she died? Lately (like the last few > days) I've been spending time conjecturing to myself > on the details of TR's birth and childhood, the days > before he came to Hogwarts to study as a wizard. How > was he informed that he was eligible to study there? > He was in a Muggle orphanage, wasn't he? Who, in a > Muggle orphanage, would have received the owl mail > from Hogwarts and given it to him? Kelsey: > Hi, Kim! I completely share your fascination with > young Tom Riddle (I guess he fascinates me as the most > human-view we get of Voldemort, and his frightening > parallels with our dear Harry). > > I'm also very interested in Tom's mother, and so want > to learn more about her. Geoff: About a year ago, we had a couple of threads which touched on this subject which might make useful reading. The first thread was "No Sex, please, we're British" and if you pick it up part way through at message 83683, follow it from there and then move over to the thread "Tommy Riddle's Birth" which begins at message 83878. Geoff http://www.aspectsofexmoor.com From beatnik24601 at yahoo.com Sun Nov 7 07:52:19 2004 From: beatnik24601 at yahoo.com (beatnik24601) Date: Sun, 07 Nov 2004 07:52:19 -0000 Subject: Harry's questions about his parents (was Harry, Hermione, Sirius, and the Dream, 2-way mirror) In-Reply-To: <20041107014718.78398.qmail@web53106.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117375 <> Juli wrote: "...If I was Harry I would have gotten as much information as possible about my parents and my grand-parents, but he didn't. I don't think he even knows his grand-parents name. He's never asked anyone were his money came from. Nothing, he doesn't seem to want to know anything at all. ... " Beatnik: I always found this trait of Harry's annoying, as well. It's not like he's not a curious person. He's always questioning: what's Fluffy guarding, what's in the CoS, what's at the end of that corridor, etc. But most of these are internal wonderings, or, at most, shared with Ron and Hermione, never with an adult. The only explanation I can come up with is Harry's upbringing. "Don't ask questions - that was the first rule of a quiet life with the Dursleys" (PS, pg 20). All through Harry's formative years, it has been drilled into him, that you can't ask questions, especially of adults. We can see this when Hagrid rescues Harry from the Dursleys; Harry is hesitant to ask Hagrid anything, even though he is bursting with questions. After years of having to 'shut up' to survive, Harry continues this pattern into his pre-adult life. As Crouch!Moody points out, Harry has an independent streak, meaning that he is willing to do lots of work on his own to figure things out, but is wary of asking anyone for help or information. Another possible reason that Harry doesn't ask questions about his family, is that it's painful to hear about the parents and grandparents that he's never going to have, especially when he can't change their fates. Harry is an action guy - it would be very hard for him to learn about something he cannot change. Consciously, or subconsciously, he knows this, and so doesn't ask the questions in the first place. It kind of makes sense, from Harry's position, even if it is infuriating for us. Beatnik From mgrantwich at yahoo.com Sun Nov 7 13:13:45 2004 From: mgrantwich at yahoo.com (Magda Grantwich) Date: Sun, 7 Nov 2004 05:13:45 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Harry's questions about his parents (was Harry, Hermione, Sirius, and the Dream, 2-way mirror) In-Reply-To: <20041107014718.78398.qmail@web53106.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041107131345.13459.qmail@web53110.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 117376 > During Christmas at GP Harry > wanted to tell Sirius not to worry that it was OK > getting oclumency lessons with Snape, but he didn't he > found plenty of time to talk to Ron and Hermione, but > not 5 minutes to talk to his godfather. It just bugs > me, why didn't they talked? If I was Harry I would > have gotten as much information as possible about my > parents and my grand-parents, but he didn't. I don't > think he even knows his grand-parents name. He's never > asked anyone were his money came from. Nothing, he > doesn't seem to want to know anything at all. > > Over the first 5 books he's met people who knew their > parents but he never asls them much more than You knew > my parents? I'm thinking about Remus, Harry found out > he was a friend of James' and he didn't ask him a > single thing about his dad. Then he meets Sirius, his > dad's best friend and again not a sinlge question. > > Juli, wondering if anyone else thinks this is weird Quite definitely weird. I completely agree with you. And considering all the times Sirius was alone with Buckbeak (and obviously bummed out if not clinically depressed) when Harry could have been with him hearing about his parents and his family....it's so frustrating. I was particularly annoyed when Snape comes to tell Harry about occlumency lessons and Molly finds him - where? getting the lowdown on his grandparents from Sirius? talking to Remus about what is was like at school with James? No, he's playing chess with Ron. Like he never seens Ron for 10 months of the flipping year anyway. And when this dormant curiosity of his does have its annual flare up, is he at 12GP where he can exercise it with Sirius? Or in the library so he can look up references to his own history (like Hermione did before she got on the Hogwarts Express in PS/SS)? No, he's in Snape's office and sticks his head into a pensieve - which he still doesn't know how to get out of. My annoyance with Harry over the whole curiosity issue has grown so much that it interferes with my willingness to see him as an attractive character. I'm starting to think he's just dumb in a lot of ways. Magda __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com From ladyramkin2000 at yahoo.co.uk Sun Nov 7 14:41:48 2004 From: ladyramkin2000 at yahoo.co.uk (ladyramkin2000) Date: Sun, 07 Nov 2004 14:41:48 -0000 Subject: forms of address Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117377 Carol I think you will find that in the Bunter books, although most boys are addressed by their surnames, close friends are either called by their Christian names or (more often) by a nick-name. For example, Herbert Vernon-Smith calls his best friend, Tom Redwing, Tom. Tom, however, refers to Vernon-Smith as Smithy, as do all the other boys, friends or enemies. No one ever addresses him as Herbert. If Harry and Ron were transported to Greyfriars, they would probably continue to address each other by their Christian names but would be known to everyone else as Potter and Weasley. The fact that there were no girls at Greyfriars or similar schools of the period is probably largely responsible (though, come to think of it, James does call Lily "Evans". Sylvia (who inherited a collection of Bunter stories and rather enjoys them) From hannahmarder at yahoo.co.uk Sun Nov 7 14:47:12 2004 From: hannahmarder at yahoo.co.uk (Hannah) Date: Sun, 07 Nov 2004 14:47:12 -0000 Subject: forms of address In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117378 > Carol: > > As I don't have access to the Billy Bunter books, can you tell me > > whether the boys refer to each other by last names, that is, whether > > McGonagall is using British schoolboy patterns for her era? Do the > > books reflect similar patterns to those used at Hogwarts? > Hannah: Well, my youngest brother is still at school in the UK, not even a posh fee-paying school like Hogwarts resembles, and he and his friends use surnames. From reading far too many 'Just William' and similar stories set in the sort of schools/eras that JKR has apparently modelled Hogwarts on, I would say that surnames are used betwen boys most of the time, except between close friends (who even then may still use surnames). The alternative is nicknames. Use of first names would be less common than the other two, I think. Hannah From tim at marvinhold.com Sun Nov 7 15:04:25 2004 From: tim at marvinhold.com (Tim) Date: Sun, 07 Nov 2004 15:04:25 -0000 Subject: Harry, Hermione, Sirius, and the Dream, 2-way mirror In-Reply-To: <20041106150030.13257.qmail@web52909.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117379 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, jp velasco wrote: > Jp here > > I don't think that Peter has a mirror... but Jo said (in her website) that the mirror will be useful in books 6 and 7. She did not elaborate but it struck me as odd when I was reading OotP when Harry forgot the mirror and had gone through all that trouble to talk to Sirius. At this point we only have Harry's mirror in pieces. Perhaps Jo will allow Harry to find Sirius's mirror. Either way I suspect that The Six may use the pieces of Harry's mirror to communicate later in the story. The fact that Harry had the means to talk to Sirius all along and did not know it was very painful for me. It seems that the moral of book 6 is don't over protect those you love. Harry ignored Sirius's present in order to protect him and that over protectiveness contributed greatly to his death. Dumbledore over protected both Harry and Sirius and look what happened. Tim From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Sun Nov 7 15:18:15 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Sun, 07 Nov 2004 15:18:15 -0000 Subject: Harry's questions about his parents (was Harry, Hermione, Sirius, and the Dream, 2-way mirror) In-Reply-To: <20041107131345.13459.qmail@web53110.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117380 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Magda Grantwich wrote: snip. > My annoyance with Harry over the whole curiosity issue has grown so > much that it interferes with my willingness to see him as an > attractive character. I'm starting to think he's just dumb in a lot > of ways. Alla: Yes, it is annoying, but I believe that this is plot dictated and plot dictated only. He is not supposed to know yet, so he is not asking. But I agree with you - it looks more and more stupid in every book. She could get away with it in the beginning with "Dursleys forbade him ot ask questions, so as abused kid he subconsciously decided that he would be better off not asking" or something like that, but he is fifteen now and had been in Hogwarts for five years. I don't think Harry is dumb, but he'd better start asking in the HBP. :o) From meriaugust at yahoo.com Sun Nov 7 15:31:04 2004 From: meriaugust at yahoo.com (meriaugust) Date: Sun, 07 Nov 2004 15:31:04 -0000 Subject: Harry's questions about his parents (was Harry, Hermione, Sirius, and the Dream, 2-way mirror) In-Reply-To: <20041107014718.78398.qmail@web53106.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117381 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Juli wrote: Juli writes: > Hagrid gave him a photo album full of pictures of his > parents, he saw it and then put it in the bottom of > his trunk. He never takes it out to take a look, nor > does he have any picture on his night-table. I found > all this very unusual. > > Juli, wondering if anyone else thinks this is weird I don't find the lack of photos weird at all (movie contamination nonwithstanding). Remember some of the only memories Harry has of his mum and dad are memories that resurfaced due to the Dementors, ie: the night they were murdured. I think that Harry has accepted that they are never coming back, and he knows that he can't change that. Looking at pictures of loved ones we've lost usually helps to remind us of all the good times we've had with them, but that's just the problem: Harry can't remember any good times with them. The only experiences he's had with them are in the Dementor scenes and Snape's pensive. And in the latter, neither came off very well. Harry literally has no good memories to look back on, so why keep something out and remind him of all that pain? He's got problems enough in the present, too. There's always been some situation or other that has kept his attention, be it the SS or the TT or whatever. He's probably had this subconscious belief that he's got plenty of time to find out about a past he can't change. Now, however, things may be different. With the Voldemort war looming and Harry knowing that he's got a big old target painted on his back, he might just want to find out all he can before he dies. Meri From tim at marvinhold.com Sun Nov 7 15:36:38 2004 From: tim at marvinhold.com (Tim) Date: Sun, 07 Nov 2004 15:36:38 -0000 Subject: Harry's questions about his parents (was Harry, Hermione, Sirius, and the Dream, 2-way mirror) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117382 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "dumbledore11214" wrote: > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Magda Grantwich > wrote: > > snip. > > > My annoyance with Harry over the whole curiosity issue has grown so > > much that it interferes with my willingness to see him as an > > attractive character. I'm starting to think he's just dumb in a > lot > > of ways. > > > Alla: > > Yes, it is annoying, but I believe that this is plot dictated and > plot dictated only. He is not supposed to know yet, so he is not > asking. But I agree with you - it looks more and more stupid in > every book. > > She could get away with it in the beginning with "Dursleys forbade > him ot ask questions, so as abused kid he subconsciously decided > that he would be better off not asking" or something like that, but > he is fifteen now and had been in Hogwarts for five years. > > I don't think Harry is dumb, but he'd better start asking in the > HBP. :o) JKR has already planted the seed with the answers to these questions. The book on wizarding geneology that Sirius used to smash that many legged instrument that skampered up Harry's arm early in OOP when they were cleaning 12 Gimmauld Place. Tim From cat_kind at yahoo.com Sun Nov 7 11:17:06 2004 From: cat_kind at yahoo.com (cat_kind) Date: Sun, 07 Nov 2004 11:17:06 -0000 Subject: An Awful Thought In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117383 SSSusan: > But isn't this a bit of an insult to JKR's writing? But isn't this a bit of an insult to JKR's writing? Even having boxes & boxes full of notes and a final chapter, wouldn't it take some *talent* to bring it all together to the standard we're used to? > I believe the only way we'll get a proper finish is if JKR herself issues it. catkind: I didn't mean to sound disrespectful! I was just trying to say that I neither expect nor want the next two books to be about tying off loose ends. I'm not so sure it couldn't be done convincingly by someone else though. JKR has a very distinctive style, and distinctive styles are in general easy to imitate. (I don't mean fanfiction there - the best fanfiction authors have their own styles, I haven't come across any that convincingly imitate Rowling's.) I can think of two examples of such things happening - Mozart's Requiem I adore, and wouldn't have known it wasn't all written by the master, though the experts doubtless would. Jill Paton Walsh's sequels to DLSayers' stories I found less convincing, because she has rather a strong voice of her own, and couldn't resist trying to correct some of Sayers' weaknesses. Evidence inconclusive, I guess. Sure it'd take talent. It'd also take someone ruthlessly suppressing their own voice, and very determined to keep all the characteristics of Rowling's world, not just their favourite ones. Rowling is a genius for creating the style and the world. No debate here. catkind (hoping this is not too OT) From cat_kind at yahoo.com Sun Nov 7 11:34:52 2004 From: cat_kind at yahoo.com (cat_kind) Date: Sun, 07 Nov 2004 11:34:52 -0000 Subject: Apparition lessons (was Re: Draco's POV?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117384 > Andrea: (snip) One thing I've wondered is how students about to come of age learn to > apparate. I remember driver's ed courses in highschool, and since > apparition is described as difficult, and similarly requires an age > limit and passing a test, perhaps there is a similar extracurricular > course available to kids of the right age. (snip) catkind: If apparition is to be the parallel of driving, then it probably won't be taught in school. In the UK there aren't usually driver's ed courses in school, it's something you do privately. If I remember correctly, you don't even have to have a paid instructor, any adult with a certain number of years experience can teach you. So I at least was picturing Mr Weasley teaching Fred and George during the summer holiday. Also, all the students will be turning 17 at different points in the year, so when would the lessons start? catkind From oppen at mycns.net Sun Nov 7 08:03:31 2004 From: oppen at mycns.net (Eric Oppen) Date: Sun, 7 Nov 2004 02:03:31 -0600 Subject: Filk---Ladies of Hogwarts Message-ID: <000201c4c4e2$ae430fa0$87560043@technomad> No: HPFGUIDX 117385 I wrote a new filk...hope y'all like it. ---------- The Ladies of Hogwarts by Eric Oppen ttto _The Female of the Species/Ladies in the SCA_ as sung by Leslie Fish There is one thing that you notice when you get to Hogwarts School, That it has both boys and girls there, and there's just one simple rule That will keep you sane and breathing as you hit the Hogwarts trail: That the female found at Hogwarts is more deadly than the male! There's Professor M. McGonagall, Assistant Headmistress, Though she may look pretty harmless she can cause you some distress! She knows Transfiguration and can turn you to a snail And the female found at Hogwarts is more deadly than the male! You may run into the well-meaning Hermione Granger But if you get in her way you will soon be in danger! For revenge is just another thing at which she'll never fail And the female found at Hogwarts is more deadly than the male! And her housemate Ginny Weasley is another potent threat She's as clever as her brothers and nobody's caught her yet! With Fred and George as role-models, how can she not prevail? And the female found at Hogwarts is more deadly than the male! There's that dreamy-eyed blonde Ravenclaw we call Luna Lovegood, You may dis her daddy's paper but I don't think that you should, For she'll feed you to the snorkacks and she'll giggle while you wail And the female found at Hogwarts is more deadly than the male! The Death Eaters also have them, as with Bellatrix Lestrange, She's a sadist who'll zap you if she sees that you're in range And she killed her cousin Sirius, sent him flying through the Veil, And the evil Hogwarts Old Girl is more deadly than the male! For the Slytherins are sneaky, and the Gryffindors are fierce, And the Ravenclaws' raw knowledge gives defense no one can pierce, And the Hufflepuffs' hard labor is what makes the good prevail And the female found at Hogwarts is more deadly than the male! [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com Sun Nov 7 16:02:06 2004 From: HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com (HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com) Date: 7 Nov 2004 16:02:06 -0000 Subject: Reminder - Weekly Chat Message-ID: <1099843326.37.63079.m16@yahoogroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 117386 We would like to remind you of this upcoming event. Weekly Chat Date: Sunday, November 7, 2004 Time: 11:00AM CST (GMT-06:00) Don't forget, chat happens today, 11 am Pacific, 2 pm Eastern, 7 pm UK time. Chat times do not change for Daylight Saving/Summer Time. Chat generally goes on for about 5 hours, but can last as long as people want it to last. Go into any Yahoo chat room and type: /join HP:1 Hope to see you there! From lealitchi at yahoo.com Sun Nov 7 12:34:33 2004 From: lealitchi at yahoo.com (lealitchi) Date: Sun, 07 Nov 2004 12:34:33 -0000 Subject: Eating Death: a ritual? (Was: Etymology of "Death Eater" ) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117387 Carol: > The idea of Death Eaters eating bottled death strikes me as some sort of evil parody of the communion service in which Catholics, Episcopalians, and various other Christian denominations (Lutherans?) symbolically eat the body and blood of Christ to share in his resurrection. Are the DEs eating Voldemort's death or their own? > Lea: I found a reference to the very similar "sin-eater" superstition in a very useful little book I own: "One medieval superstition now almost forgotten is that of the sin- eater: someone, either professional of a dupe, would eat food passed over the corpse. This represented the sins that the dead person had comitted during their lifetime, and the sin-eater took on responsibility for them by eating the food." Could the DE's really be a part of LV's immortality experiments by taking on ("eating") his death and mortality....? Lea From Zarleycat at aol.com Sun Nov 7 16:11:36 2004 From: Zarleycat at aol.com (kiricat2001) Date: Sun, 07 Nov 2004 16:11:36 -0000 Subject: Harry's questions about his parents (was Harry, Hermione, Sirius, and the Dream, 2-way mirror) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117388 > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Magda Grantwich > wrote: > > snip. > > > My annoyance with Harry over the whole curiosity issue has grown so > > much that it interferes with my willingness to see him as an > > attractive character. I'm starting to think he's just dumb in a > lot > > of ways. > > > Alla: > > Yes, it is annoying, but I believe that this is plot dictated and > plot dictated only. He is not supposed to know yet, so he is not > asking. But I agree with you - it looks more and more stupid in > every book. Marianne: Agreed to all of the above. JKR can't reveal everything until its proper place in the story. That's obviously her perogative as the author, but I think it can lead to differing levels of frustration for readers. For some, Harry's history of living with the "Don't ask questions" Dursleys is enough to explain his lack of curiosity regarding his family background. For me, that excuse wore out completely in OoP, when Harry was living in the same house as Sirius. Maybe JKR wanted to portray Sirius as so depressed or unstable or whatever, that we are supposed to believe he'd never want to or be capable of having this sort of discussion with Harry. But, even when Sirius was in a positive mode, such as the first part of the Christmas break, there was no evidence the two of them shared any sort of serious conversation. It's irksome to me. It may be important to the gradual revelations of the plot, but it strikes me as unnatural for both Harry and Sirius to have so assiduously avoided this sort of conversation. Marianne From klevasseur at earthlink.net Sun Nov 7 13:52:20 2004 From: klevasseur at earthlink.net (ms_luna_knows) Date: Sun, 07 Nov 2004 13:52:20 -0000 Subject: Harry's questions about his parents (was Harry, Hermione, Sirius, and the Dream, 2-way mirror) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117389 Juli wrote: > "...If I was Harry I would have gotten as much information as possible about my parents and my grand-parents, but he didn't. I don't think he even knows his grand-parents name. He's never asked anyone were his money came from. Nothing, he doesn't seem to want to know anything at all. ... " Beatnik: > I always found this trait of Harry's annoying, as well. It's not like he's not a curious person. He's always questioning: what's Fluffy guarding, what's in the CoS, what's at the end of that corridor, etc. But most of these are internal wonderings, or, at most, shared with Ron and Hermione, never with an adult. The only explanation I can come up with is Harry's upbringing. > Another possible reason that Harry doesn't ask questions about his family, is that it's painful to hear about the parents and grandparents that he's never going to have, especially when he can't change their fates. Harry is an action guy - it would be very hard for him to learn about something he cannot change. Consciously, or subconsciously, he knows this, and so doesn't ask the questions in the first place. > > It kind of makes sense, from Harry's position, even if it is infuriating for us. Ms. Luna: I have always been confused by Harry's lack of "interest" in his family, until I think of my Grandfather. His mother died during the flu epidemic in 1919 when my Grandfather was 2 days old and my grandfather, and his 3 other siblings were raised by 3 different families. But my grandfather didn't know he was adopted until he was 13 and told so by one of his blood relations. Since I found out this information, from my grandmother, I have been doing geneological research to discover who my great-grandparents were, but my grandfather doesn't want to hear any of it.....it's very strange to me, because I think I would want to find out everything I could about them. My grandfather feels that by finding out about his birth parents he is somehow disrespecting his adopted family. I think that maybe Harry's reasoning for not finding out about his parents at every opportunity is he has an idealized picture in his mind of his family, and is afraid to "mess it up, somehow "disrespecting" his internal view. He also as alot of information about himself and this new world he finds himself in that he has to sort through, plus he is a teenager, that anymore new information may make his "head explode". We also must remember that Harry's last bit of information (from Snape's pensive) about is father was very negative...it's either fear or teenage angst that is keeping Harry from finding out more about his family. ---IMHO :-) Ms. Luna From klevasseur at earthlink.net Sun Nov 7 14:36:26 2004 From: klevasseur at earthlink.net (ms_luna_knows) Date: Sun, 07 Nov 2004 14:36:26 -0000 Subject: The only one he ever feared? / TR's past In-Reply-To: <20041107053613.50351.qmail@web53106.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117390 Kim had written: > How did TR find out that he was the last heir of Slytherin? His father didn't tell him. Did his mother know and leave some sort of message for him before she died? Kelsey: > I got this impression that TR is angry at his mother for giving him his Muggle-father's name, but I could "hear" a hint of anger on her behalf because she loved a Muggle who snubbed and left her. I just feel like he carried out revenge on his father for abandoning his mother and him. I get an impression that Ms. Slytherin didn't marry Mr. Riddle, but that he abandoned his witch girlfriend when she was pregnant, and that she never got over her love for Mr. Riddle, and named her son after him. I have this feeling/theory that she was (despite her Slytherin heritage) good and met a tragic end, leaving her son to be bitter, angry, and evil. > Kelsey, who would love to read a romantic-tragedy entitled "The Heir of Slytherin and The Muggle Snob" Ms. Luna: I share the same fascination with the Riddle mystery as you two. And because of that I went back and read the threads suggested by Geoff and still questions are left unanswered. Although I believe this thread has reached it's end and will most likely end with me, the reasons behind why a witch would remain in the muggle world to have a baby and name that baby after the man who abandoned her are curious. My theory is that Tom's parents, being rich, snobbish and very rude (semi-quote from GOF) were threatening Tom with disinheritance if he remained with the Malvolo girl. Maybe they saw her as unfit for their son. (although TMR says that he abandoned her because she was a witch, we all know that LV/TMR is a liar, and can't believe everything he says!) Anyway, my thought is that they both still loved each other which would explain (to me anyway) why she remained near the Riddle's and named her son after the man she was still in love with. Hoping that after she had the baby that the family would welcome her in and the baby in. Obviously she was very wrong, otherwise they would have raised the baby after she died. TMR can't really KNOW exactly what went on between his parents, he is obviously filling in the blanks to suit his story. Ms. Luna's very humble opinion of the events surrounding TMR's birth. From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Sun Nov 7 17:37:49 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Sun, 07 Nov 2004 17:37:49 -0000 Subject: An Awful Thought In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117391 SSSusan: > > But isn't this a bit of an insult to JKR's writing? Even > > having boxes & boxes full of notes and a final chapter, > > wouldn't it take some *talent* to bring it all together to the > > standard we're used to? > > I believe the only way we'll get a proper finish is if JKR > > herself issues it. catkind: > I didn't mean to sound disrespectful! I was just trying to say > that I neither expect nor want the next two books to be about > tying off loose ends. SSSusan: Neither do I, in the sense that I don't want a listing of Loose End #223 and Its Answer. :-) You know, an obvious, "Whoops, better give those Snape-obsessed fans their bit of backstory here so they don't go nuts wondering what THAT was all about." Rather, what I trust JKR--and only JKR--to be able to do is to bring it all together in the next two books in such a way that many of the loose ends are *NATURALLY* tied up in the process. In ways where we'll say, "Oh, THAT'S how it all fit!" or "Aha, so Pippin was wrong about Lupin!" [hee hee] or "Brilliant! How did she plan that so well?" catkind: > I'm not so sure it couldn't be done convincingly by someone else > though. JKR has a very distinctive style, and distinctive styles > are in general easy to imitate. SSSusan: And here's where I just disagree, I suppose. I think even though people *can* mimic the style and [in our hypothetical scenario] would have access to voluminous notes and outlines, I still think there are interconnections and depths of mysteries and details of character that only she knows how to bring to fruition or full revelation. I suppose if one assumes she's sketched out *all* of these in notes, then finishing it out would be highly possible. But, while I don't know this to be true, *I'm* going on rather the opposite assumption -- that parts of it are simply still in there in her head *only* and so we still need *her* head. :-) Does that make sense at all? Siriusly Snapey Susan From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Sun Nov 7 17:41:57 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Sun, 07 Nov 2004 17:41:57 -0000 Subject: Apparition lessons (was Re: Draco's POV?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117392 Andrea: > > One thing I've wondered is how students about to come of age > > learn to apparate. I remember driver's ed courses in > > highschool, and since apparition is described as difficult, and > > similarly requires an age limit and passing a test, perhaps > > there is a similar extracurricular course available to kids of > > the right age. > (snip) catkind: > If apparition is to be the parallel of driving, then it probably > won't be taught in school. In the UK there aren't usually driver's > ed courses in school, it's something you do privately. > > So I at least was picturing Mr Weasley teaching Fred and George > during the summer holiday. > > Also, all the students will be turning 17 at different points in > the year, so when would the lessons start? SSSusan: Good questions. And what comes to mind for me when you mentioned picturing Fred & George studying w/ Mr. Weasley is: What about the kids from Muggle homes like Hermione? I wonder where *they* do their learnin'? Siriusly Snapey Susan From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com Sun Nov 7 17:44:50 2004 From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (arrowsmithbt) Date: Sun, 07 Nov 2004 17:44:50 -0000 Subject: Harry's questions about his parents (was Harry, Hermione, Sirius, and the Dream, 2-way mirror) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117393 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "meriaugust" wrote: > > I don't find the lack of photos weird at all (movie contamination > nonwithstanding). Remember some of the only memories Harry has of > his mum and dad are memories that resurfaced due to the Dementors, > ie: the night they were murdured. I think that Harry has accepted > that they are never coming back, and he knows that he can't change > that. Looking at pictures of loved ones we've lost usually helps to > remind us of all the good times we've had with them, but that's just > the problem: Harry can't remember any good times with them. The only > experiences he's had with them are in the Dementor scenes and > Snape's pensive. And in the latter, neither came off very well. > Harry literally has no good memories to look back on, so why keep > something out and remind him of all that pain? > Not quite only the Dementors and the Pensieve, there's the Mirror as well. Suddenly he's presented with what looks like a whole crowd of relatives he never knew he had, he sits there for hours staring at them - and asks not one damn question of DD, Hagrid, MM or anyone who could tell him something. Hagrid follows it up with the photograph album, but no "Who's this? When was this taken?" An album provided by friends, lots of them is the implication - how many have we seen? Two. Sirius and Lupin. Who were Lily's friends? Or didn't she have any? Even if Harry doesn't want to know we do. It's authorial sadism perpetrated on the reader, that's what it is. This 'disinterest' is something I've complained about before, it's so blatant, it's un-natural. When they first meet Hermione tells him she "knows all about him" that he's in the history books - she even comments on the fact that he's never bothered to look for himself, but still he exhibits all the curiousity of of a stuffed turnip. Wouldn't you look? I would. Wouldn't you ask Hermione what she knows? Yep. Harry hasn't. Not once in 5 years. Nearly as bad is the fact that Hermione doesn't up and tell him - she rarely holds back on other subjects, especially in the earlier books. Grrr. We know why of course - well, probably. The first draft of PS/SS gave everything away. So much so that 15 chapters were excised or changed. So it's highly likely that an awful lot of explication happened back then - but the re-writing meant that things once known had to be concealed (not so easy when you've got the amount of detail to deal with that JKR has) but fortunately in books once something has been explained the characters don't harp on about it as much as we tend to in real life. So if it's removed Harry ends up looking like an incurious dolt, whereas previously he probably had asked the questions and got answers. Doesn't help our frustration levels though. Kneasy From dontask2much at yahoo.com Sun Nov 7 19:00:42 2004 From: dontask2much at yahoo.com (charme) Date: Sun, 7 Nov 2004 14:00:42 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Eating Death: a ritual? (Was: Etymology of "Death Eater" ) References: Message-ID: <000901c4c4fc$154347b0$6601a8c0@MITRE.ORG> No: HPFGUIDX 117394 From: "lealitchi" > "One medieval superstition now almost forgotten is that of the sin- > eater: someone, either professional of a dupe, would eat food passed > over the corpse. This represented the sins that the dead person had > comitted during their lifetime, and the sin-eater took on > responsibility for them by eating the food." > > Could the DE's really be a part of LV's immortality experiments by > taking on ("eating") his death and mortality....? > charme: Interesting thought....that could be how they get the Dark Mark. That may also be how DE's take the final "step" in proving loyalty to LV. charme From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Sun Nov 7 19:06:55 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Sun, 07 Nov 2004 19:06:55 -0000 Subject: Eating Death: a ritual? (Was: Etymology of "Death Eater" ) In-Reply-To: <000901c4c4fc$154347b0$6601a8c0@MITRE.ORG> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117395 Lealitchi wrote previously: > > Could the DE's really be a part of LV's immortality experiments by > > taking on ("eating") his death and mortality....? > > > > charme: > > Interesting thought....that could be how they get the Dark Mark. That may > also be how DE's take the final "step" in proving loyalty to LV. > Alla: Could be, but if DE eat only Voldemort's death, it would mean that they personally get nothing from it - no immortality, nothing. So, why would they stay with Voldemort? What is it in there for them? I guess I still prefer the idea of DE and Vodemort eating or drinking some metaphorical part of death in general, which would give them all immortality. From manawydan at ntlworld.com Sun Nov 7 19:33:16 2004 From: manawydan at ntlworld.com (manawydan) Date: Sun, 7 Nov 2004 19:33:16 -0000 Subject: [HPforGrownups] forms of address References: <1099832666.4831.51314.m12@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <000a01c4c500$a2e05820$704b6d51@f3b7j4> No: HPFGUIDX 117396 Geoff wrote > I was never a Billy Bunter (The Fat Owl of the Remove) fan but I did > glance at the books years ago and I'm pretty certain they use > surnames. That's right. The first Bunter story came out round about 1909. The boys invariably call one another by their surnames. The masters are always "Mr". Can't recall how the Headmaster was addressed. Cheers Ffred O Benryn wleth hyd Luch Reon Cymru yn unfryd gerhyd Wrion Gwret dy Cymry yghymeiri From foxmoth at qnet.com Sun Nov 7 19:34:03 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Sun, 07 Nov 2004 19:34:03 -0000 Subject: Unreliable narrator (Was: Snape's stalling) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117397 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "nkafkafi" wrote: > It is of course impossible to disprove all these suspicions now, unless JKR explicitly denies them in her website, and even then it is not always enough for some readers ;-). Therefore, we anti-conspiracy readers should be clear about our position. You simply trust Snape. I simply trust Lupin (and also Snape). No shame in it. There are very good chances we are right. Until now, JKR had never let us become really attached to a character and then told us he is ESE. She has no need to resort to such lowly means, when she can get much grander effects by using magical devices. In CoS it turns out that the most innocent and less suspicious person, ickle firstie Ginny Weasley, was the one who dunnit. Of course, she didn't know what she was doing at the time. In the next two books it might be Ron or Hermione or Hagrid or Dumbledore. Why not? We have the Imperius curse, we have metamorphmagi who can assume the shape of any person. Who needs ESEs? < Pippin: We do, because, as you said, there are some people you simply trust. If such a person has never chosen to betray you, then you are a lucky man. Magical devices won't cut it -- this is about choice. There is, IMO, something more important to Lupin than Harry. It wouldn't be the first time a good man has betrayed his dearest friend and fallen into bad company for a good cause. Et tu, Remus? I agree with you about Dumbledore and Snape, surprisingly enough, and I'm not sure we're different types of reader. I initially thought suspecting Lupin was as absurd as you do--it was only in trying to build a deliberately absurd case against him as a joke that I discovered there was credible evidence. I'm not a conspiracy theorist in real life--though if you'd care to cut me in on the money JKR is paying you to contest my theories I'll be happy to take a share. (just kidding!) Pippin From bboyminn at yahoo.com Sun Nov 7 20:55:31 2004 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Sun, 07 Nov 2004 20:55:31 -0000 Subject: Harry's questions ... parents - Dangerous Questions In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117398 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "dumbledore11214" wrote: > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Magda Grantwich > wrote: > > snip. > > > My annoyance with Harry over the whole curiosity issue has grown > > so much that it interferes with my willingness to see him as an > > attractive character. I'm starting to think he's just dumb in a > > lot of ways. > > > Alla: > > Yes, it is annoying, but I believe that this is plot dictated and > plot dictated only. He is not supposed to know yet, so he is not > asking. But I agree with you - it looks more and more stupid in > every book. > bboyminn: Undoubted from the external world, the world of the reader, you are right JKR doesn't want us to know things and therefore Harry doesn't ask. But from the internal world, the world of the characters, we must ponder whether these never-asked-questions are in-character; and whether there is a consistent flow of storyline, in a sense, is the storyline also in-character. If the absents of questions is so jarringly abrupt that it pulls us out of the story in-the-mement then that is a sign of poor writing. > Alla continues: > > She could get away with it in the beginning with "Dursleys forbade > him ot ask questions, so as abused kid he subconsciously decided > that he would be better off not asking" or something like that, but > he is fifteen now and had been in Hogwarts for five years. > > I don't think Harry is dumb, but he'd better start asking in the > HBP. :o) > > Alla bboyminn: When ever this comes up, I bring up the same point. I really don't think people are giving enough weight to the fact that Harry was raised in an abusive and oppressive household. Yes, people acknowledge that, but I don't think they make enough of an effort to look at the underlying psychology. Living in a household like this is like living with an armed bomb that has a hair-trigger; the slightest tremor is likely to set it off. So, the abused is likely to learn very early on to tread lightly through that world. An abusive household is also irrational, there is no logic or reason to what sets off the abuser. In many cases, the abuse is initiated by a random insignificant event that is nothing more than an excuse for the abuser to re-engage in abuse. Examples: You bring the abuser a cup of tea, and it is either too hot or too cold, or the abuse is triggered by the fact that you put the tea down on an end table rather than handing it to him directly. Another example which more clearly demonstrates the irrationality of it all, you bring the abuser a beer and the beer is too cold, like you can actually control the temperature of the beer. No logic ...no rhyme ...no reason. Being too quiet is as likely to set them off as being too noisy. In this dangerous and irrational environment, you learn very quickly to stay as small, unobtrusive, and as invisible as possible. To us, a question is a question, but to someone in an abusive situation, a question is a dangerous and potential deadly thing. So, you learn to avoid them. Carrying this farther, given that an abused child is under the control of adults in every aspect of his life, and those adults are either abusers, enablers, or indifferent, you really don't develop much trust or faith in adults. In addition, the Enablers and the Indifferent are more likely to get you into trouble than out of it. Harry is also, in general, very polite; that's another defense mechanism; it's a way of disarming people. Harry, while friendly to most, really only has two or three close and trusted friends. Again, the enablers, the indifferent, the unengaged are more likely to cause trouble than prevent it. So, Harry sticks closely to the small haven of safety that is his few friends. Harry doesn't go to adults for help, and this is true of a lot of kids. Kids, in general, live in their own private world. They don't go to adults when the should because adult are authority, and authority meters out punishments. Going to an adult, in a child's eyes, is a sure and swift road to trouble. Harry has far more motivation and experience warding him off of trusting adults than most other kids. Harry is independant. In an abusive household, you have no other choice but to take care of yourself and solve your own problems. You either learn to be independant, or you die. In addition, Harry makes the same mistake we all make with the people we love; we assume there will always be time. That heart-to-heart we've desperately wanted to have our whole lives can wait until next week, or until we aren't so busy. No hurry, there will always be time. Then suddenly our loved one dies and we desperately and deeply regret that we didn't make the time. I say, that if you look at the underlying psychology of Harry, then his actions are very reasonable and consistent given his history. They are very much in-character. Harry's been alone his entire life, or at least the part of it that he can remember, and it is from that deep seated point of singularity that he lives his life. Just a few thoughts. Steve/bboyminn (was bboy_mn) From cat_kind at yahoo.com Sun Nov 7 19:06:04 2004 From: cat_kind at yahoo.com (cat_kind) Date: Sun, 07 Nov 2004 19:06:04 -0000 Subject: An Awful Thought In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117399 > catkind: > > I'm not so sure it couldn't be done convincingly by someone else > > though. JKR has a very distinctive style, and distinctive styles > > are in general easy to imitate. > > > SSSusan: > And here's where I just disagree, I suppose. I think even though > people *can* mimic the style and [in our hypothetical scenario] > would have access to voluminous notes and outlines, I still think > there are interconnections and depths of mysteries and details of > character that only she knows how to bring to fruition or full > revelation. I suppose if one assumes she's sketched out *all* of > these in notes, then finishing it out would be highly possible. > But, while I don't know this to be true, *I'm* going on rather the > opposite assumption -- that parts of it are simply still in there in > her head *only* and so we still need *her* head. :-) catkind: Makes sense. Maybe our difference is more in that I think only the main loose ends are important, i.e. the ones in the notes: Who kills who, how. Who is ESE if anyone. That's what I'd call depths of mysteries. The other stuff around and about it will be doubtless brilliant and cool, but provided it is done convincingly it doesn't matter much to me what the details are. That's kind of what I'm lumping under the heading of style: the colourful characters, the random cool bits of magic, the atmosphere, the realism or otherwise. Interconnections - well, maybe, but that's more economy of invention isn't it? If one character will do two jobs, let them, and make sure everything comes up at least once in another context before it's vital to the plot. I'm guessing a skilled writer could snitch that as well. Maybe we want to invent a JKR Turing test - if, on being given the last book without covers, you'd believe it to be the real thing, then the imitators have succeeded by my measure. And by this measure, I don't think it'd be impossible. Improbable, but not impossible. catkind From eggplant9998 at yahoo.com Sun Nov 7 21:37:39 2004 From: eggplant9998 at yahoo.com (eggplant9998) Date: Sun, 07 Nov 2004 21:37:39 -0000 Subject: Dirty Harry / 'Good' Harry In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117400 "justcarol67" wrote: > So the end justifies the means? This question has always mystified me; it's like asking how long is a piece of string. The only answer I can give is, it depends on how good the end is and how bad the means are; for example, if the end is preventing a holocaust and the means is being rude to a friend for 5 minutes then yes, the end justifies the means. Remember they are at WAR and to expect to survive, much less defeat an enemy, without doing anything with even the slightest moral taint is ridiculous. > Stealing is still stealing, even > if you're Robin Hood. It is June 5 1944, you and your company of parachutist commandos have landed off course and deep behind the Nazi lines. If you do not complete your mission and sabotage the Nazi gun emplacements overlooking Omaha beach thousands of allied soldiers will be killed tomorrow on D day; but you'll never be able to march to there in time. But then you spot a parked German truck with a full tank of gas. "Sergeant," you yell, "We can take that truck and get there in time and save all those soldiers," "No," the grizzled old Sergeant replied, "We can't do that, that truck belongs to the Germans, taking it would be stealing and stealing is wrong." Question: What is wrong with this picture? > it wasn't really up to Harry and his > friends to find out who the > Heir of Slytherin was I wasn't up to Harry to defeat Voldemort 4 times either, but if he hadn't done it the job wouldn't get done > nor did they accomplish much (except > establishing Draco's innocence) by > making a dangerous potion In war some missions are successful and some are not. > throughout OoP Harry's anger is more > intense, more vicious, more*venomous* > than in any other book, Yes and about time too! I agree with Dumbledore when he told Harry, "You are not nearly as angry with me as you should be". And artistically I think it was a very good move on Rowling's part. In future books I hope Harry becomes downright scary, so creepy in fact that at time you're not even certain he's still the good guy. Eggplant From juli17 at aol.com Mon Nov 8 00:03:10 2004 From: juli17 at aol.com (juli17 at aol.com) Date: Sun, 7 Nov 2004 19:03:10 EST Subject: Harry's questions about his parents Message-ID: <1a5.2a2291d4.2ec011be@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 117401 > My annoyance with Harry over the whole curiosity issue has grown so > much that it interferes with my willingness to see him as an > attractive character. I'm starting to think he's just dumb in a lot > of ways. > > Magda I think JKR wants to keep the readers in the dark about Harry's family so she can spring a few surprises on us. She's mentioned that there will be revelations about Lily, for instance, and that we will hear something about Harry's grandparents even though they don't play a pivotal role. If Harry acted the least bit like a normal kid and asked constant questions about his parents and grandparents, then too much would be let out of the bag. To explain Harry's lack of curiosity internally (so as to make sense of the character) I suppose one can use the "He was abused" theory to let him off the hook. It still doesn't jibe for me. Because of the abuse he lived with, finding out his parents (and, presumably, grandparents) were loving and devoted to him would be something you'd think he'd embrace, wanting to know everything he could find out about them. (After all, parentless children often create such loving parents in their minds, so imagine what joy it would bring to find out the fantasy was indeed true). I prefer to chalk it down to the plot device it clearly is, and assume Harry does think about his family, and has asked questions about them out of the readers' presence. It's preferable to assuming he's stupid or in some way insensitive--at least for me--even if it means conjecturing beyond what's actually written. Julie [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Mon Nov 8 00:20:42 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Mon, 08 Nov 2004 00:20:42 -0000 Subject: Harry's questions ... parents - Dangerous Questions In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117402 Steve wrote: " In this dangerous and irrational environment, you learn very quickly to stay as small, unobtrusive, and as invisible as possible. To us, a question is a question, but to someone in an abusive situation, a question is a dangerous and potential deadly thing. So, you learn to avoid them." Del replies : I agree with your explanation of the psychology of an abused child. However, by OoP, Harry is no longer reacting like an abused kid. He's firmly on the way to recovery. He's been challenging Uncle Vernon's abusive authority for several years now. In OoP, he makes it very clear that he has no more fear of Dudley. And above everything else, he asks questions to the last person on Earth he would normally : Petunia. After the Dementor attack, and all the way until he's whisked off to 12GP, he keeps bugging Aunt Petunia for answers. And yet as soon as he gets to 12GP, he forgets about asking questions ! Sirius even has to "remind" him that he has questions on his mind ! And yet, even after Sirius makes it crystal clear that no matter what the others think, he is willing to answer any of Harry's questions, Harry does not ask anymore. He asked Petunia, the very one who drilled "Don't ask questions" in his head, but he doesn't ask anyone else. It's not logical to me. Del From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Mon Nov 8 00:41:34 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Mon, 08 Nov 2004 00:41:34 -0000 Subject: Harry's questions about his parents In-Reply-To: <1a5.2a2291d4.2ec011be@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117403 Juli: > To explain Harry's lack of curiosity internally (so as to make sense > of the character) I suppose one can use the "He was abused" theory > to let him off the hook. It still doesn't jibe for me. Because of the abuse > he lived with, finding out his parents (and, presumably, grandparents) > were loving and devoted to him would be something you'd think he'd > embrace, wanting to know everything he could find out about them. Alla: Oh, Juli, of course this excuse is not the strongest one for me, but one can only do as much of metathinking. :o) "Abused theory" works for me or should I say worked for me prior to OOP not in a sense that Harry would not WANT to know about his loving parents but in a sense that Dursleys firmly drilled into him that he is not supposed to ask or he will be punished. You know, the only reason for not asking is fear of punishment, nothing else. But after OOP I am firmly with Marianne. He lived in the same house with Remus and Sirius. Enough said. :o) Juli: > I prefer to chalk it down to the plot device it clearly is, and assume > Harry does think about his family, and has asked questions about > them out of the readers' presence. It's preferable to assuming he's > stupid or in some way insensitive--at least for me--even if it means > conjecturing beyond what's actually written. Alla: I welcome any explanation which helps me not to think of Harrry as stupid. :o) And of course the main reason is plot dictated. From jferer at yahoo.com Mon Nov 8 03:18:15 2004 From: jferer at yahoo.com (Jim Ferer) Date: Mon, 08 Nov 2004 03:18:15 -0000 Subject: Apparition lessons (was Re: Draco's POV?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117404 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "cubfanbudwoman" wrote: > > Andrea: > > > One thing I've wondered is how students about to come of age > > > learn to apparate. I remember driver's ed courses in > > > highschool, and since apparition is described as difficult, and > > > similarly requires an age limit and passing a test, perhaps > > > there is a similar extracurricular course available to kids of > > > the right age. > > (snip) > > catkind: > > If apparition is to be the parallel of driving, then it probably > > won't be taught in school. In the UK there aren't usually driver's > > ed courses in school, it's something you do privately. > > > > So I at least was picturing Mr Weasley teaching Fred and George > > during the summer holiday. > > > > Also, all the students will be turning 17 at different points in > > the year, so when would the lessons start? > > SSSusan: > Good questions. And what comes to mind for me when you mentioned > picturing Fred & George studying w/ Mr. Weasley is: What about the > kids from Muggle homes like Hermione? I wonder where *they* do > their learnin'? Susan, Good point. We also know from Arthur that many wizards don't Apparate, either, so their children would need instruction as well. Kids must get instruction at school. Since they can't apparate on Hogwarts grounds, they must have to walk down to Hogsmeade to practice. Receiving instruction is probably legal before 17; you just can't take your test and do it on your own before that time. From dk59us at yahoo.com Mon Nov 8 04:04:21 2004 From: dk59us at yahoo.com (Eustace_Scrubb) Date: Mon, 08 Nov 2004 04:04:21 -0000 Subject: Did the Potters know the prophecy? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117405 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Tammy" wrote: > > Empooress wrote: > > > Remember the bit about having defied Voldy three times > > perhaps at the time of Harry's birth that had not yet > > occured. And I would think that the Longbottoms also > > had gone into hiding as well. I would think that both > > sets of parents had been told about the prophecy. Come > > to think of, I wonder how Voldy's followers knew where > > to find the Longbottoms so soon after the attack. > > While the canon does not give a specific time, it does > > seem to indicate that it occured shortly after the > > attack on the Potters, as the followers where trying to > > find out where Voldy was, so that appears to me that > > they did not know what had happened at Godic's Hollow. > > > Tammy replies: > > Actually it states in canon that the attack on the Longbottoms > happened "just when everyone thought they were safe" which seems to > indicate that it happened after a decent period of time (I'm > thinking a month or two). No one knew what happened to Voldemort if > you recall, not even after it happened. That's why Bella & co. went > to Frank and Alice, as aurors, if anyone would know then they would > know (at least that's what the DEs would think). Thus if the > Longbottoms had goneinto hiding, they would have been out of hiding > by then, as it was "safe". Now Eustace_Scrubb: I suspect that both sets of parents were told of the prophecy, but I am less certain of _when_ they were told. I think that depends on how much Dumbledore knew about Voldemort's plans/actions in the rather long period of time between Trelawney's prophecy and the actual attack on Godric's Hollow. As to the timing of the attack on the Longbottoms, it all depends on exactly when "everyone thought they were safe." The canon evidence from PS/SS indicates that many (perhaps most) in the Wizarding World felt safe within about 24 hours--safe enough to throw caution to the winds and send owls out in broad daylight; set off fireworks in Cornwall that attracted notice on the muggle news; ignore the convention of wearing muggle clothes when out in the muggle world; and telling arch-muggles like Vernon Dursley that even they should be happy, as You-Know-Who was gone at last. Further, even Dumbledore says that he and McGonnagal might as well go join in the celebrations once they've put Harry on the Dursleys' doorstep. None of these actions would I expect from people who still feared that Voldemort might swoop in and AK them in mid-celebration--least of all from Dumbledore, who was a leader in the opposition to Voldemort and certainly wouldn't accept his enemy's demise (temporary though it proved to be) without good reason. Because of this I'd assign the attack on the Longbottoms within the first week or two after Godric's Hollow, maybe even sooner. Now what I'd really like to know is _why_ the WW seems to have been so quickly convinced that Voldemort was gone and no longer a threat. Cheers, Eustace_Scrubb From catlady at wicca.net Mon Nov 8 04:03:57 2004 From: catlady at wicca.net (Catlady (Rita Prince Winston)) Date: Mon, 08 Nov 2004 04:03:57 -0000 Subject: CHAPTER DISCUSSION: Chapter 30 (Grawp) In-Reply-To: <004901c4c165$2c90c7c0$1502a8c0@TOSHIBALAPTOP> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117406 Elfun Debbie summarized Chapter 30 in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/117118 : << nags Harry about asking Snape to resume Occlumency lessons, saying Ron told her he was muttering in his sleep. Harry lies, claiming he was exhorting Ron to reach for the Quaffle; Ron is hurt by the remark but Harry felt vindictive pleasure. >> This is relevant to the thread about Harry being innately good or choosing to be good. If he was CHOOSING to 'be good' by following the Golden Rule, he would have either thought first before being nasty, or apologized afterwards when he saw Ron hurt. A slight moment's vindictiveness doesn't make Harry BAD, but it IS related to TMR's motivating emotion of hate, rage, and cruelty (like the tunicate is related to whales and chimpanzees!). I suppose that any reader who had never felt any little tinge of that emotion wouldn't understand how LV's current behavior might be related (!) to his childhood... Like all Harry's other anger and nastiness in OoP, how much is a natural human response under the circumstances (maybe all of it) and how much is leakage from Voldie through the mind-link? Juli replied in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/116925 to my previous post on that subject: << I don't think every time he was mad or angry at them it was because LV was mad/angry. Harry behaved like this cause he had a lot on his mind, (snip) . ... I can understand his mood, he's mad at everything and everyone, >> Even tho' LV wasn't mad/angry at any particular person or thing at those moments, LV is *always* mad/angry, so it would always be 'leaking' to Harry, and adding to all those other reasons for anger that I snipped. Back to the chapter summary, whose questions have all been very well answered already, but I want to mouth off on: << 5. Hagrid calls Grawp "harmless" even though Grawp caused Hagrid's injuries. He needs to be tied down. Harry doubts he could ever be permitted to mingle with humans. Is this a signal to reassess Hermione's conclusion in GoF that wizarding attitudes toward giants is "just prejudice"? Do Grawp's circumstances cause or contribute to his wildness? >> The whole description of how giants live, killing each other to become ruler, and beating each other up to take the other's food or whatever, suggests a flaw in Hermione's "it's just prejudice" attitude. If we view them as Beasts, they're going extinct because of habitat loss, not enough room for them to spread out and avoid conflict by avoiding each other, and that's sad: the Earth's wealth of species (except germs! and parasitic worms!) should be preserved in Nature Preserves. But if we view them as Beings, that is, moral agents, I think they are not very Good. Once we discussed this before, and someone told me not to be so prejudiced against the giants' culture for being different than mine. In that case, Hagrid trying to 'civilize' Grawp by indoctrinating him into human wizarding culture would be analoguous to the 19th century efforts to 'civilize' Native Americans or Australian Aborigines by taking them from their parents and sending them to boarding schools where they were beaten for speaking their native languages, and surely JKR is the kind of person who would NOT approve of that. By the way, the description of how unhuman full-blood giants look, as well as their behaviour, made me wonder a lot what Hagrid's father saw in Hagrid's mother. From catlady at wicca.net Mon Nov 8 04:10:25 2004 From: catlady at wicca.net (Catlady (Rita Prince Winston)) Date: Mon, 08 Nov 2004 04:10:25 -0000 Subject: Goodness - Free Will - Harry (Harry's good core) Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117407 Alla wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforG rownups/message/117075 : << What do you think is the reason for Harry to choose the side of good? >> Actually, I don't think Harry 'chose the side of good' until some time after he went to Hogwarts and heard so much talk about the Dark Side and the Light Side. I don't think young Harry often chose 'to be good'. I think he often chose to help people and not to hurt people, which had much the same result as choosing to do good, because of the circumstances in which he found himself. The two motives could sometimes conflict -- canon examples from DD: he chose to do good while hurting Harry and annoying the Dursleys by putting Harry with the Dursleys so that he could survive, he chose not to hurt Harry by telling him of his destiny and his link with LV back at the end of PS/SS, but admitted at the end of OoP that that was the wrong decision. (Young Harry did sometimes choose to hurt people. Early in PS/SS, he talked back to Dudley, saying "The poor toilet's never had anything as horrible as your head down it -- it might be sick." I took that as a happy sign that the Dursleys hadn't managed to beat the spirit out of him, not as a tendency to evil.) And the reason that Harry often chose to help people and not to hurt people (yes, I'm going all the way around Robin Hood's barn to answer your question) is that he had empathy for (most/many/some) people. He 'felt their pain' and therefore tried to help. Sometimes he enjoyed people's pleasure, as in his first interaction with Ron. (Whether that enjoyment was empathy, which would have caused him to enjoy seeing Cedric and Cho so happy with each other despite his own loss, or some sort of pride "look what *I* did, look how happy *I* made him" is a detail.) There has been a lot of inconclusive research on how to teach children empathy. One idea is to give them a puppy, on condition that they take care of it. Another is Religious Instruction. Young Tom would have been lectured about the Bible, sermonized, and rehearsed for Catechism by the same hated orphanage workers he blamed for all his other miseries. Young Harry would have received similar but less strict instruction (because of the different decade) from a schoolteacher or clergyman or television show whom his hated Dursleys despised, and therefore felt less inclined to dismiss it all as hypocrisy. I rejoice in the excuse to repeat my theory that Harry has learned a LOT from television. We saw in PoA that Uncle Vernon watches the morning news; I assert that Uncle Vernon also watches the evening news and professional sports, Aunt Petunia watches home-making shows, gossip shows (especially about the royals?), tear-jerker movies, and the popular game shows, and Dudley watches *everything* in search of sex and violence. And Harry sits in the back of the living room, because that way he is more convenient accessible to run fetch more snacks for Dudley or another beer or Vernon than if he were in his closet. Television is not usually considered to teach empathy, but in Harry's case, he would have been influenced to feel sorry for the character being beaten up because Vernon or Dudley was cheering for the beater. Del wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGr ownups/message/117163 : << But why did he tell Ron to go and have a pasty to start with ? As the narrator reminds us, Harry never had an opportunity to share before, so he doesn't know that sharing creates good feelings. Moreover, the Dursleys taught him by example that it is better *not* to share, that the ideal way is to have as much for yourself as possible. So *why* did he invite Ron to his feast ? What prompted him to share? >> He saw Ron looking hungry and felt empathy. Dungrollin in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforG rownups/message/117151 : Also emphasized empathy, altho' I don't agree with her that 'anticipatory guilt' had a whole lot to do with young (before maybe GoF) Harry's choices. As for Riddle, lacking both empathy and guilt freed him to be evil and cruel, but I believe some people can lack empathy and maybe even guilt and still lead relatively harmless lives inventing calculus or building strange sculptures out of junk yard scraps. Riddle WANTED to do evil, cruel things -- he wanted to hurt people and be feared -- rather than wanting e.g. to be let alone to discover the first language humans ever spoke by learning all modern and ancient languages and finding what they have in common. It seems very clear that Riddle's cruelty and hate came from rage at what he suffered as a child, but what caused Bellatrix's cruelty and hate? (Siriusly Snapey Susan wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/117135 : << Harry may have been one of those kids who, having nothing & being bullied, rather than succumbing simply chose to try to be different. And when it FELT GOOD, he knew it was the right course. It's not THAT uncommon, nor do I find it to be unbelievable. >> "If it feels good, do it"? Well, I don't think "If it feels bad, do it" is any better a guide to ethical behavior. Kelsey wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/117194 : << Maybe it's love (capacity for and ability to) that is that infamous "moral core/moral choices" difference between Harry and Voldie. And if that's true, then Harry can't go against that moral core and do something morally wrong (i.e. murder, blood-baths, etc.) to become "Dirty Harry" [the grandfather of this thread] and defeat Voldie. He's going to have to do something morally sound through love to defeat Voldie. >> But plenty of real life people who have the capacity for love also have the capacity to do evil things and become murderers. From catlady at wicca.net Mon Nov 8 04:32:31 2004 From: catlady at wicca.net (Catlady (Rita Prince Winston)) Date: Mon, 08 Nov 2004 04:32:31 -0000 Subject: Remus-Sibyl/ProseStyle/Names/TriWizard/Designed HP/Animagi/Wick/WelshGG/more Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117408 Carol wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/116752 : << I keep thinking of Wormtail's silver hand and Trelawney's comment that Lupin is unwilling to let her see his future in her crystal ball. >> I always see that interaction between Trelawney and Lupin as she is in romantic pursuit of him and he is fleeing. Her offer to gaze into her crystal for him was a transparent (!) ploy to get him alone so she could try to "accidentally" hold his hand, and maybe tell him that the Sight predicted he would marry soon. He avoided that. Then she unexpectedly turned up at Christmas dinner, and almost the first thing she said was "Where is dear Professor Lupin?" The question showed what was on her mind; clearly the reason she came to the dinner was in hope of sitting next to him or across from him and playing footsie under the table. She's an old spinster, but much as I remember being a young spinster; I remember that non-verbal irrational conviction that if only I could get whichever man I was in love with at the time alone, surely he would turn out to be in love with me, too. Kneasy wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/116886 : << Do you read Jo for her prose style? I doubt it; I doubt anyone else does either. It's not very good. >> Well, actually ... yes. I'm not claiming that her style is beautiful or artistic or anything like that, but I do find it charming and humorous and friendly and delightful, and it is style, not characters and plot, that causes me to read on and on when I open one of the books in the middle to quote canon for a post. Carol wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/116887 : << With the exception of Narcissa, named after a flower (or maybe she enjoys looking at her reflection, like the mythical Narcissus!), all the Black family members of Sirius's generation are named after stars or constellations >> I like to fantasize that the wizarding folk have named some star "Narcissa", so as not to let the Black family naming tradition be spoiled by JKR. I even tried to find a star Rho Dolph-something (Delphini, I guess) for Rodolphus's name... Of course the naming 'tradition' doesn't go back as far as Phineas Nigellus and doesn't include Aunt Elladora. Was she an aunt by marriage? Or if she'd been Essadora, I could have pointed to encyclopedia articles on a star named S Doradus... Magda wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/117068 : << Fleur and Krum hung out with their own schoolmates and didn't mingle with Hogwarts students much. >> That always struck me as strange -- if the purpose of the TWT was to encourage international friendships among young wizards and witches, why did the organizers set it up so that the students of different schools barely met each other except at one Yule Ball? Del wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGr ownups/message/117078 : << Was Harry designed as the Anti-LV weapon ? ... There were 2 young couples in the first Order (maybe more, but we know of those 2 only) : the Potters, and the Longbottoms. Those 2 couples conceived their first kid after or around the time they entered the Order. Those 2 couples gave birth 1 day apart. Those 2 couples had good reasons *not* to have a kid at that time. The Longbottoms were both Aurors, ie soldiers during a war, not the best time to conceive a child for soldiers. The Potters were extremely young and supposedly actively engaged in the battle as well. A Prophecy was given, not even 2 months before the birth of the kids, announcing that one of them would vanquish LV. Both kids grew up in extremely difficult circumstances, and yet both turned out extremely good kids : courageous, not resentful, tenacious, intelligent, and so on. Well, I can't help but wonder what's going on there. Are all those things just coincidences, or were they planned ? >> It's quite possible that there was a prophecy earlier than Trelawney's prophecy, which predicted that a boy born at a certain time (or conceived at a certain time) would have powers greater than the Dark Lord, or would bring victory to his father's side, or some such. It's quite possible that someone the young couples in the Order trusted (ie DD) told them about the prophecised son and asked them to try to produce one, and they did. As you know, I suspect the Death Eaters of having done exactly that, causing a Malfoy, Crabbe, Goyle, Nott, and *possibly* a Macnair (why not a Lestrange?) to be in Harry's year. (Not an Avery because he was *such* a loser that no girl would marry him.) Before GoF, I spun an elaborate tale which I did not want to believe, that the Prophecy was a long time in advance and that DD understood it to mean that only a son of James Potter and Lily Evans could defeat LV (someone else had a plot in which they both carried a rare recessive gene for a superhero power), and therefore persuaded both of them to break up with the people they were already engaged to (possibly Severus Snape in the case of Lily Evans) and marry each other in order to create the Prophecy Boy. Also that LV found out that DD believed the Prophecy was about James Potter's son and that is why he needed to kill both Harry and James but not necessarily Lily (unless she had been pregnant at the time). However, I prefer to believe that it was Fate who planned Harry and Neville, and that the young couples (in my fanfic, there were 3 young couples, because I included Susan Bones's parents) all conceived *unplanned* offspring as the result of a mellow but drunken Halloween party. I also like the idea that the Hero who can defeat is LV is not Harry, not Neville, but only Harry and Neville working together. Patrick wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/117095 : << Perhaps animagi don't have much control over the animal they become...gods help the person whose inner self is an elephant... >> I dunno that becoming an elephant would be such a bad thing. If the aisles are wide, you could transform to reach things down off high shelves. If you wanted to tear down a tree, you could transform instead of using wand magic's Mobiliarbus or Arbium Leviosa. It would be convenient when Crabbe and Goyle try to beat you up. It might be useful in wizarding politics, if the voters think that a large, intelligent, and impressive Animagus form is sign of a strong, intelligent, and noble personality. Animagi DON'T have control over the animal they become: JKR has confirmed in interviews that the Animagus doesn't get to choose his/her animal form, but instead the animal form is a reflection of his/her personality. << http://www.geocities.com/aberforths_goat/October_2 000_Live_Chat_America_Online.htm Q: Does the animal one turns into as an Animagi reflect your personality? JKR: Very well deduced, Narri! I personally would like to think that I would transform into an otter, which is my favorite animal. Imagine how horrible it would be if I turned out to be a cockroach! http://www.scholastic.com/harrypotter/author/transcript2.htm Q: If you were Animagus, what kind of animal would you be? A: I'd like to be an otter -- that's my favourite animal. It would be depressing if I turned out to be a slug or something. http://www.the-leaky-cauldron.org/JKRWorldBookDay2004.html Q: When you turn into an Animagus, can you choose what animal you become? Or does this get "assigned" to you? JK Rowling replies -> No, you can't choose. You become the animal that suits you best. Imagine the humiliation when you finally transform after years of study and find that you most closely resemble a warthog. >> I want to know, what happens if a person who has become an Animagus goes over the whole training again, from scratch, will heesh get another animal form? Can a person who is a werewolf become an Animagus? with an animal form other than wolf? Can a werewolf who is an Animagus with an animal form other than wolf avoid turning into a wolf monster at Full Moon by turning into hiser animal before the moment? Mimbeltonia wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/117132 : << Any thoughts on how an otter fits Hermione's personality?? >> To me, it doesn't. But it does fit JKR's personality (as shown in HP ouevre). Otters are intelligent and very physically capable, but their defining personality trait is playfulness. JKR write playfully, with pun names and literary references, but when have we ever seen Hermione being playful? As for Kim and Finwitch's earlier question on McGonagall being a cat Animagus, it makes sense to me. It worked *perfectly* for book 1, chapter 1: cats and Minerva are curious, but secretive: they keep their dignity in public, and do not like for anyone to be *amused* at them ... other traits that I assign to Minerva because of being a cat: she can fight fiercely, she much enjoys sensual pleasures (e.g. nice hot bath) in private, she is affectionate in private. I am sorry to admit that another Cat trait is not being concerned with Ethics, but with whether one can get away with it, and at most with being nice to those we like. Finwitch wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/117126 : << Wick St Lawrence, West Wick and Way Wick. (Why do these remind me of Flit*wick*?) >> I think that in English place-names, Wick and Wich are alternate spellings of a Saxon word meaning 'village', so I assume that Flitwick was named after a place, rather than after the wick of a candle. ... I suppose the 'wick' of a candle is related to wicker and willow and wicked and witch, all from a Proto-Indo-European root for 'twist'.... Kneasy wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/117128 : << If it's supposed to have some association with G.G. that might cause a bit of a problem. His name is Anglo-Saxon and the Sorting Hat states (in GoF): "Bold Gryffindor from wild moor..." Wales has a bit of a shortage of wild moors; in fact I can't think of any in the Principality. I'd have thought it more likely he was from your neck of the woods - what with Dart-, Ex-, Bodmin, it seems like you've got a surfeit of 'em. >> In my opinion, the Sorting Hat's song ("Fair Ravenclaw, from glen") at best refers to the places where the Founders were sojourning just before they founded the song, and more likely were chosen simply for rhyme and not fact. I am troubled that the Founders' personal names include two Saxon and no Welsh nor Scot. I therefore Prophecised like Trelawney that "Godric Gryffindor" had been born "Gryddyd Glyndwr" and had his name changed for him by the Saxons, Normans, and other miscellany in the troop of Muggle men-at-arms that he ran away from wizarding home to join when he was around 13 or 14, because it seemed more exciting and romantic than the daily drudgery of studying magic. Kneasy wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/117302 : << Yeah, I have mentioned [the elimination of magic from the world] as a possible outcome a couple of times over the past year. Nobody seemed interested - mostly, I think, because they didn't want this fantasy to be killed off. The end of the WW, the death of JKR's wonderful playground? Horrors! How can this be?! Though as Jo has said she doesn't believe in magic and resolutely refuses to consider the possibility of sequels, well - it does give one food for thought. >> While I CERTAINLY don't WANT the wizarding world to be destroyed, I have suggested that the story ends with the whole wizarding world, Harry, and all the characters except Hermione dead and destroyed, and then Hermione writes an account of it disguised as fiction. I don't like the idea that the triumph of good, or the safety of ordinary people, depends on *destroying* the innate, god-given abilities that some people are born with. Carol wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/117332 : << Has anyone given thought to the question of who's taking care of Theo now? Would a sixteen-year-old motherless boy whose father is in Azkaban (or St. Mungo's) be living on his own? A guest of the Malfoys (Narcissa and Draco)? A temporary ward of his Head of House, Professor Snape? >> I figure Theo's father is so old that he could have a *grand-child* older than Theo. Theo might move in with a sibling old enough to be his parent and a nephew or niece older than him. Kelsey wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/117368 : << I get an impression that Ms. Slytherin didn't marry Mr. Riddle, but that he abandoned his witch girlfriend when she was pregnant, and that she never got over her love for Mr. Riddle, and named her son after him. >> This is a forbidden "I agree!" post. I like to think that Tom, Senior never did find out that his bit 'o fun was a witch, but simply had never intended to marry her in the first place. Because of the irony that if Tom, Junior had known the truth, he would have become a crusader against premarital sex instead of racist murderer. And his mother may have sought to live among Muggles because her parents or whoever had warned her against trusting a Muggle (and against premarital sex) and she had told them they were a bunch of old-fashioned bigots and either they had disowned her altogether or she was too ashamed to go back and have to tell them that they'd been right and she'd been wrong. And then she might have died in childbirth for lack of a wizarding midwife (or maybe even a maternity ward at St. Mungo's!). Because wizarding babies do unintended magic when they're fightened or angry, or in pain I suppose, and everyone said that being born is like being pushed and squeezed and suffocated, very scary and uncomfortable, so a wizarding baby could do terribly dangerous things while being born, and wizarding midwives would have special training in how to counter those things. The people at the orphanage might, I suppose, have told him that his parents were married and his father deserted his mother (that may have been the story his mother told whomever she found refuge with, maybe some terribly unpleasant Home for Fallen Women, because of being ashamed of unmarried pregnancy), but they wouldn't have told him that his mother was a witch, because they were modern Muggles who didn't believe in that nonsense. But then how did he become so certain that his father deserted his mother because he found out that she was a witch? Surely someone must have told him -- who? As for finding out that he was the last descendent of Slytherin, that probably didn't take MUCH research -- if he knew his mother's maiden name, he could have looked it up in genealogy books in Hogwarts Library. If he didn't know his mother's maiden name, he could have found it out from someone who had known her or known of her -- someone who heard the name 'Tom Riddle' and said "That was the loathsome Muggle that dear Marvella fell in love with" or heard the name 'Marvolo' and asked: "Are you related to Marvolo Last-Blood?" From dolis5657 at yahoo.com Mon Nov 8 06:46:08 2004 From: dolis5657 at yahoo.com (dcgmck) Date: Mon, 08 Nov 2004 06:46:08 -0000 Subject: Did the Potters know the prophecy? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117409 [snip] > Now Eustace_Scrubb: [snip] > > Now what I'd really like to know is _why_ the WW seems to have been so quickly convinced that Voldemort was gone and no longer a threat. dcgmck: The rapidity with which the WW learned of the Potters' demise, Harry's survival, and LV's departure has troubled me as well. Tonight for some reason, however, a couple of ideas seeped through: The WW has a number of means of nearly instantaneous communication, from the Floo Network to mirrors like that of Sirius and James to the legilemens among them, to name a few. These are in addition to the usual means of owls. Then there are at least two newspapers and the Wizarding Wireless, both of which would have had special bulletins, much the way our television and radio do upon momentous occassions. Finally, (and I think I've seen this one on this forum before,) there were the Death Eaters like the Malfoys who were only too eager to declare themselves suddenly freed from possession and trances when they felt Voldemort's mark decrease in the degree of burn on their arms. Surely if Snape and Karkaroff could feel the mark increasing as Voldemort's power grew in GoF, all the DE's could feel it suddenly cool and ease when LV's power was suddenly withdrawn (kinda like the loss of Sauron's motivating will in "Return of the King"). Thoughts? From slgazit at sbcglobal.net Mon Nov 8 07:46:37 2004 From: slgazit at sbcglobal.net (slgazit) Date: Mon, 08 Nov 2004 07:46:37 -0000 Subject: Harry's questions ... parents - Dangerous Questions In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117410 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "delwynmarch" wrote: > And yet as soon as he > gets to 12GP, he forgets about asking questions ! Sirius even has to > "remind" him that he has questions on his mind ! And yet, even after > Sirius makes it crystal clear that no matter what the others think, he > is willing to answer any of Harry's questions, Harry does not ask anymore. I don't have the quote but I seem to remember that it says in the book that the kids could get no more answers about the ongoing situation while in the OoP headquarters. As to Harry not asking Sirius and others about his parents, nowhere does it say that Harry did not ask people about his parents. Nor is there indication that he did. We are simply left in the dark. And lest we forget, Harry had more burning issues on his mind - such as emotionally getting over the graveyard scene and getting ready for the hearing. My impression is that Harry probably avoids getting too much information about his parents - it may be just too painfull. Not only were they murdered, but he may be feeling somewhat responsible - after all - they died to protect him. It's a responsibility/guilt that can very well explain why he tries to remain emotionally aloof. However, when given the chance to have some contact with them or their spirits (through the Mirror of Erised, the dementors, his Patronus, the graveyard scene, etc.) he shows a great deal of emotion and love. I think it is not memories of them that he is missing but rather the experience of being part of a living family. He wishes they were part of his life, not a bunch of dry notes in a book. One more thing about Harry is that he does not want to show any kind of emotional vulnerability. Asking people about his parents will expose too much. Salit From jolka55 at poczta.onet.pl Mon Nov 8 09:00:51 2004 From: jolka55 at poczta.onet.pl (Julia) Date: Mon, 08 Nov 2004 09:00:51 -0000 Subject: Harry's questions ... parents - Dangerous Questions In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117411 > bboyminn wrote: > > When ever this comes up, I bring up the same point. I really don't > think people are giving enough weight to the fact that Harry was > raised in an abusive and oppressive household. Yes, people acknowledge > that, but I don't think they make enough of an effort to look at the > underlying psychology. Julia replies: Yes, you're right. Many people don't do this but I think theu don't even know how to do it so we can't blame them. You know, I also think that the fact that Harry was brought up in such an unfriendly enviroment plays a huge role in his life and determines his behavior. However, I really don't know why you call it an abusive household... > bboyminn wrote: > Living in a household like this is like living with an armed bomb that > has a hair-trigger; the slightest tremor is likely to set it off. So, > the abused is likely to learn very early on to tread lightly through > that world. > > An abusive household is also irrational, there is no logic or reason > to what sets off the abuser. In many cases, the abuse is initiated by > a random insignificant event that is nothing more than an excuse for > the abuser to re-engage in abuse. > > Examples: You bring the abuser a cup of tea, and it is either too hot > or too cold, or the abuse is triggered by the fact that you put the > tea down on an end table rather than handing it to him directly. > Another example which more clearly demonstrates the irrationality of > it all, you bring the abuser a beer and the beer is too cold, like you > can actually control the temperature of the beer. No logic ...no rhyme > ...no reason. Being too quiet is as likely to set them off as being > too noisy. > Julia replies: Again, I agree with your description of the situation. But IMO Harry wasn't in such a situation. Of course it was bad, even really really bad, Dursley's house wan't normal but still they didn't act as a typical abusers. They spent very little time with Harry, in fact they didn't want to spend time with him at all. He wasn't their child so they didn't care. And Harry was a smart kid - he quickly learned how to survive. What I want to say is that Dursleys didn't care to abuse Harry, they couldn't care less. The only situations that really made them angry were these where Harry did some sort of magic. And when it comes to questions... I think that Harry when he was young - before getting the letter - didn't have reasons for asking. Of course he at some point as curious but it wasn't that important then. He didn't remember his parents. They were dead so what was the point for asking - he was little then and didn't know the importance of parents (Dursleys and Dudley weren't a good example) But now... I think that (apart from the fact that JKR doesnt want to reveal too much) he is somehow afraid of asking, afraid of what a answers may be. And - he is a teenager - he really doesn't know what to do... PS: What exactly do you want Harry to ask? Which questions do you think he might ask? Julia From finwitch at yahoo.com Mon Nov 8 08:59:33 2004 From: finwitch at yahoo.com (finwitch) Date: Mon, 08 Nov 2004 08:59:33 -0000 Subject: Remus-Sibyl/ProseStyle/Names/TriWizard/Designed HP/Animagi/Wick/WelshGG/more In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117412 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Catlady (Rita Prince Winston)" > As for finding out that he was the last descendent of Slytherin, that > probably didn't take MUCH research -- if he knew his mother's maiden > name, he could have looked it up in genealogy books in Hogwarts > Library. If he didn't know his mother's maiden name, he could have > found it out from someone who had known her or known of her -- someone > who heard the name 'Tom Riddle' and said "That was the loathsome > Muggle that dear Marvella fell in love with" or heard the name > 'Marvolo' and asked: "Are you related to Marvolo Last-Blood?" Finwitch: You know, it's entirely possible that a SNAKE told him all that. We do know that Tom Riddle was a Parselmouth, right? A Snake that witnessed everything... and anyway, resourcefulness IS a Slytherin trait, so I suppose young Tom did find out... Finwitch From gbannister10 at aol.com Mon Nov 8 11:39:33 2004 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Mon, 08 Nov 2004 11:39:33 -0000 Subject: Remus-Sibyl/ProseStyle/Names/TriWizard/Designed HP/Animagi/Wick/WelshGG/more In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117413 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Catlady (Rita Prince Winston)" wrote: Finwitch: > << Wick St Lawrence, West Wick and Way Wick. (Why do these remind me > of Flit*wick*?) >> > > I think that in English place-names, Wick and Wich are alternate > spellings of a Saxon word meaning 'village', so I assume that Flitwick > was named after a place, rather than after the wick of a candle. ... Geoff: Flitwick is a small town 7 miles south of Bedford and about 45 miles north of London. "-wick" and "-wich" are indeed very common as place name endings (sometimes pronounced with a silent "w"). Kelsey: > << I get an impression that Ms. Slytherin didn't marry Mr. Riddle, but > that he abandoned his witch girlfriend when she was pregnant, and that > she never got over her love for Mr. Riddle, and named her son after > him. >> Catlady: > This is a forbidden "I agree!" post. I like to think that Tom, Senior > never did find out that his bit 'o fun was a witch, but simply had > never intended to marry her in the first place. Because of the irony > that if Tom, Junior had known the truth, he would have become a > crusader against premarital sex instead of racist murderer. Geoff: This cropped up way back in a thread "No Sex, please, We're British" and I wrote the following reply in message 83700 - (quote begins) Perhaps I should point out that your argument is not upheld by evidence in canon: "'You think I was going to use my filthy Muggle father's name for ever? I, in whose veins runs the blood of Salazar Slytherin himself, through my mother's side? I, keep the name of a foul, common, Muggle who abandoned me even before I was born, just because he found out his /wife/ was a witch? (my emphasis)'" Tom Riddle to Harry (COS UK edition p.231) (quote ends) Geoff http://www.aspectsofexmoor.com From finwitch at yahoo.com Mon Nov 8 12:49:47 2004 From: finwitch at yahoo.com (finwitch) Date: Mon, 08 Nov 2004 12:49:47 -0000 Subject: Harry's questions ... parents - Dangerous Questions In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117414 > > Del replies : > I agree with your explanation of the psychology of an abused child. > > However, by OoP, Harry is no longer reacting like an abused kid. He's > firmly on the way to recovery. > > He's been challenging Uncle Vernon's abusive authority for several > years now. In OoP, he makes it very clear that he has no more fear of > Dudley. And above everything else, he asks questions to the last > person on Earth he would normally : Petunia. > > After the Dementor attack, and all the way until he's whisked off to > 12GP, he keeps bugging Aunt Petunia for answers. And yet as soon as he > gets to 12GP, he forgets about asking questions ! Sirius even has to > "remind" him that he has questions on his mind ! And yet, even after > Sirius makes it crystal clear that no matter what the others think, he > is willing to answer any of Harry's questions, Harry does not ask anymore. > > He asked Petunia, the very one who drilled "Don't ask questions" in > his head, but he doesn't ask anyone else. It's not logical to me. Finwitch: Logic has nothing to do with it! It has to do with subconcious - and actually, Harry doesn't fear not so much of punishment but rejection. Dursleys *already* reject him (and they'd be puninshing him anyway) - so it's not OF Dursleys. When he has people who care for him, he doesn't dare ask because he fears he'll lose them/their love. I also think that, well - partly Harry doesn't ask questions because he doesn't know enough to know what to ask. He's eager to listen if someone tells him, but he just doesn't know enough to ask. And um - Harry was *angry* when he bombarded Petunia with questions, and having just faced the Dementors (and saving her ickle Duddykins), something happened to show the beginning for questions... Finwitch From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Mon Nov 8 13:07:05 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Mon, 08 Nov 2004 13:07:05 -0000 Subject: Goodness - Free Will - Harry (Harry's good core) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117415 > Siriusly Snapey Susan wrote in > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/117135 : > > << Harry may have been one of those kids who, having nothing & being > bullied, rather than succumbing simply chose to try to be different. > And when it FELT GOOD, he knew it was the right course. It's not > THAT uncommon, nor do I find it to be unbelievable. >> Catlady replied: > "If it feels good, do it"? Well, I don't think "If it feels bad, do > it" is any better a guide to ethical behavior. SSSusan: Well, "If it feels good, do it" was NOT what I was saying, if by that you mean the selfish, "anything that makes ME feel good I'm gonna do-- consequences be damned" kind of guide to behavior. Rather, I'm talking about a positive reinforcement/intrinsic reward kind of thing. Sometimes when a person does X, he ends up feeling good [as in, rewarded, "right," warm & fuzzy inside], and this can be a positive reinforcement for the behavior in question. Intrinsic reward, you know? I maintain that for many people is simply feels good to do good. Harry may have found that sharing with Ron, for instance, made him feel good about himself. And he liked feeling good about himself, particularly after years of being told that he's worthless. This kind of positive experience might well motivate future action. Is that clearer? Siriusly Snapey Susan From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Mon Nov 8 13:14:50 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Mon, 08 Nov 2004 13:14:50 -0000 Subject: Harry's questions ... parents - Dangerous Questions In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117416 Julia: > Again, I agree with [Steve's] description of the situation. But IMO > Harry wasn't in such a situation. Of course it was bad, even really > really bad, Dursley's house wan't normal but still they didn't act > as a typical abusers. They spent very little time with Harry, in > fact they didn't want to spend time with him at all. He wasn't > their child so they didn't care. And Harry was a smart kid - he > quickly learned how to survive. > What I want to say is that Dursleys didn't care to abuse Harry, > they couldn't care less. SSSusan: I don't know, Julie. What do you make of this line from PoA? "Watching Harry being bullied by Uncle Vernon was Dudley's favorite form of entertainment." How can it be Dudley's favorite form of entertainment if it doesn't happen? Siriusly Snapey Susan From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Mon Nov 8 14:04:30 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Mon, 08 Nov 2004 14:04:30 -0000 Subject: Harry's questions ... parents - Dangerous Questions In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117417 Finwitch wrote: "It has to do with subconcious - and actually, Harry doesn't fear not so much of punishment but rejection. Dursleys *already* reject him (and they'd be puninshing him anyway) - so it's not OF Dursleys. When he has people who care for him, he doesn't dare ask because he fears he'll lose them/their love." Del replies : Do you have any canon to back that up ? Because I don't see that in Harry. Finwitch wrote : " I also think that, well - partly Harry doesn't ask questions because he doesn't know enough to know what to ask. He's eager to listen if someone tells him, but he just doesn't know enough to ask." Del replies : What do you mean by he doesn't know "enough" ? When Sirius tells him he knew Harry's grandparents, what doesn't Harry know that would prevent him from asking "Oh, my grandparents ?! What were they like ?" ? Finwitch wrote : "And um - Harry was *angry* when he bombarded Petunia with questions, and having just faced the Dementors (and saving her ickle Duddykins), something happened to show the beginning for questions..." Del replies : Harry was still angry when he got to 12GP. And his temper didn't improve when the only people he thought of questioning (Ron and Hermione) couldn't tell him anything. Del From mgrantwich at yahoo.com Mon Nov 8 14:25:40 2004 From: mgrantwich at yahoo.com (Magda Grantwich) Date: Mon, 8 Nov 2004 06:25:40 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Harry's questions ... parents - Dangerous Questions In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041108142540.26102.qmail@web53104.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 117418 --- Steve wrote: > When ever this comes up, I bring up the same point. I really don't > think people are giving enough weight to the fact that Harry was > raised in an abusive and oppressive household. Yes, people > acknowledge that, but I don't think they make enough of an effort > to look at the underlying psychology. > > Living in a household like this is like living with an armed bomb > that has a hair-trigger; the slightest tremor is likely to set it > off. So,the abused is likely to learn very early on to tread lightly > through that world. > > An abusive household is also irrational, there is no logic or > reason to what sets off the abuser. In many cases, the abuse is > initiated by a random insignificant event that is nothing more than > an excuse for the abuser to re-engage in abuse. > > Steve/bboyminn (was bboy_mn) The Dursleys are nobody's nominees for "Guardians of the Year" but they're not abusive in the sense that Steve refers to above. Their utter paranoia about Harry if nothing else would have prevented them from doing anything that would be likely to attract the attention of school or social worker authorities to the boy. Also it's clear from Harry's inner thoughts during the first chapters of PS/SS that while he's not happy, he's not beaten down mentally and hasn't surrendered to any kind of self-blame. I don't think Harry would qualify as an "abused child" in any legal or clinical sense of the word in the backstory of the series. He was definitely a neglected child, and that is bad enough. Not until locked him in his room with not enough food everyday did he become an abused child (in COS). Magda __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com From dk59us at yahoo.com Mon Nov 8 14:34:41 2004 From: dk59us at yahoo.com (Eustace_Scrubb) Date: Mon, 08 Nov 2004 14:34:41 -0000 Subject: Did the Potters know the prophecy? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117419 Eustace_Scrubb pondered: > [snip] > > Now what I'd really like to know is _why_ the WW seems to have > > been so quickly convinced that Voldemort was gone and no longer a > > threat. dcgmck came up with some really good ideas: > The WW has a number of means of nearly instantaneous > communication...Then there are at least two newspapers and the > Wizarding Wireless, both of which would have had special > bulletins... > > Finally, (and I think I've seen this one on this forum before,) > there were the Death Eaters like the Malfoys who were only too > eager to declare themselves suddenly freed from possession and > trances when they felt Voldemort's mark decrease in the degree of > burn on their arms. Surely if Snape and Karkaroff could feel the > mark increasing as Voldemort's power grew in GoF, all the DE's could > feel it suddenly cool and ease when LV's power was suddenly > withdrawn... Eustace_Scrubb again: I like both of these ideas, but especially the second. While I think you're right that the WW has the means to spread news very quickly, I'm still puzzled as to why this news was apparently taken uncritically as _the truth_. I still would think that one would accept it guardedly at first. We could compare it, I suppose, with the Allied reactions to V-E or V-J day in World War II, but especially in those cases, the other sides' surrender had been in view for days or (in the case of Europe) weeks/months...it was just a matter of when. In the case of the First Voldemort War, LV was said to be at the height of his powers and no one would have had any reason to expect his imminent defeat. If I was a wizard, I'd smell a rat and I certainly wouldn't start dancing in the streets for a while. Now as to the effect of LV's defeat on the Dark Mark and therefore on the DEs, I suspect that those folks _would_ have had an instantaneous notice that the boss was gone. I would guess that the ones who thought quickly enough about saving their own skins prepared their stories for use as soon as the rest of the WW caught on. But I also think that this makes it even more likely that the LeStrange gang went after the Longbottoms soon after Godric's Hollow--they would have been just as aware that LV was gone as the Malfoys' ilk, but would have been feverishly trying to find out what happened...now I really doubt they waited weeks or months to try to find LV. Cheers, Eustace_Scrubb From quigonginger at yahoo.com Mon Nov 8 16:00:10 2004 From: quigonginger at yahoo.com (quigonginger) Date: Mon, 08 Nov 2004 16:00:10 -0000 Subject: When were the Longbottoms attacked? (was Re: Did the Potters know the prophecy?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117420 Eustace Scrubb said:(re: how people knew so quickly that LV was gone:) (much, much snipping) > Now as to the effect of LV's defeat on the Dark Mark and therefore on > the DEs, I suspect that those folks _would_ have had an instantaneous > notice that the boss was gone. I would guess that the ones who > thought quickly enough about saving their own skins prepared their > stories for use as soon as the rest of the WW caught on. But I also > think that this makes it even more likely that the LeStrange gang went > after the Longbottoms soon after Godric's Hollow--they would have been > just as aware that LV was gone as the Malfoys' ilk, but would have > been feverishly trying to find out what happened...now I really doubt > they waited weeks or months to try to find LV. Ginger replies: I'd agree on that last part except for Sirius' description in GoF of the Longbottom incident. When the trio visits him in the cave, they start talking about young Barty. Sirius says, (ch.27, p.527 US paperback) "Crouch's son was caught with a group of Death Eaters who'd managed to talk their way out of Azkaban. Apparently they were trying to find Voldemort and return him to power." Sirius was in Azkaban within a couple days of LV's demise. Since Bella was his cousin, he'd have taken special notice of her arrival compared to the arrivals of strangers or near strangers. I would think that talking one's way out of Azkaban would take a bit of time. Earlier in that same paragraph, Sirius said, "When Voldemort disappeared, it looked like only a matter of time until Crouch got the top job" (referring to Minister). "But then something rather unfortunate happened." It's kind of hard to interpret that paragraph. Crouch definately had supporters for his fight against LV and the DE's; that much is clear. When LV disappeared, people thought he'd be the next Minister. How long did it take for them to go from just supporting him to veiwing him as the heir-apparent? He seems to have had enough time to gather that type of support from enough people that it was later mentioned that when it was time for a new Minister, not only did Fudge get it, but Crouch was "shunted sideways into the Department of International Cooperation". I read that as though the shunting happened at the same time as Fudge got the job- perhaps as a result of it. With the Quibbler article in OoP saying Fudge had only been in office for 5 years, this sounds like I read it wrong. So Lestrange, party of three, had time to talk their way out of Azkaban and Barty had time to gather support for Ministerial candidate between the time Harry Vapourflected and the time that the Longbottoms were hit. Sounds like a bit of time to me, but I could well be reading it wrong. Thoughts? Ginger, who FINALLY finished raking! From jolka55 at poczta.onet.pl Mon Nov 8 17:04:54 2004 From: jolka55 at poczta.onet.pl (Julia) Date: Mon, 08 Nov 2004 17:04:54 -0000 Subject: Harry's questions ... parents - Dangerous Questions In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117421 > SSSusan wrote: > I don't know, Julie. What do you make of this line from PoA? > > "Watching Harry being bullied by Uncle Vernon was Dudley's favorite > form of entertainment." > > How can it be Dudley's favorite form of entertainment if it doesn't > happen? > Julia replies: Yeah, you've got me here. I haven't known about this quote. But still I think that Harry can't be qualified as an abused child. Mayabe it's not because of Dursley's attitude towards him (which, you're right, was sometimes abusive) but Harry's attitude towards the Dursleys. If they were his parents the whole case would be different but Harry knew that they aren't. So it wasn't hard for him to keep a distance between them. I really don't know how to describe this difference but you should see it. For example: A child when abused feels guilty about what s/he has done and because s/he has made parents angry. Harry didn't feel guilty because 1) he didn't know what he had done wrong 2)he didn't feel emotional bond between him and the Dursleys. And - I just thought about it - he maybe even knew that they couldn't have sent him to orphanage... so he didn't fear them... Harry was very smart kid then... And he hadn't an 'abused' personality - he was able to resist that abusive behaviour. And that's what IMO doesn't make him an abused child... I agree whith Magda who said that: "The Dursleys are nobody's nominees for "Guardians of the Year" but they're not abusive in the sense that Steve refers to above. Their utter paranoia about Harry if nothing else would have prevented them from doing anything that would be likely to attract the attention of school or social worker authorities to the boy. Also it's clear from Harry's inner thoughts during the first chapters of PS/SS that while he's not happy, he's not beaten down mentally and hasn't surrendered to any kind of self-blame." This is Harry's attitude and character which prevent him from being an abused child... Julia From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Mon Nov 8 17:41:58 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Mon, 08 Nov 2004 17:41:58 -0000 Subject: Harry's questions ... parents - Dangerous Questions In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117422 SSSusan wrote: > > I don't know, Julie. What do you make of this line from PoA? > > > > "Watching Harry being bullied by Uncle Vernon was Dudley's > > favorite form of entertainment." > > > > How can it be Dudley's favorite form of entertainment if it > > doesn't happen? Julia replies: > Yeah, you've got me here. I haven't known about this quote. But > still I think that Harry can't be qualified as an abused child. > And he hadn't an 'abused' personality - he was able to resist that > abusive behaviour. And that's what IMO doesn't make him an abused > child... SSSusan: I agree that Harry doesn't ACT like a child who's been abused, but I don't see how that makes him NOT an abused child? Of course there are worse parents/guardians than the Dursleys, but that doesn't mean Harry wasn't abused or bullied by them. And Harry's not acting like a "typical" abused child doesn't make him NOT one. In fact, that's one of the things folks have pondered around here before. WHY/HOW is it that Harry & Tom, both with crappy upbringings, could have ended up going such different paths and with such different belief systems? Regardless of the answers to those questions, the fact that Harry behaves altruistically and Voldy behaves evilly [wd?] does NOT mean that Harry wasn't bullied or abused. Siriusly Snapey Susan From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com Mon Nov 8 17:52:13 2004 From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (Barry Arrowsmith) Date: Mon, 8 Nov 2004 17:52:13 +0000 Subject: Unreliable narrator (was: Snape's stalling) Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117423 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "nkafkafi" wrote: > I'm pretty sure you are an anti-conspiracy reader, Potioncat, like 99% of us (including some who won't admit it ;-) ). We anti-conspiracy readers know that the books are full of conspiracy, of course, but we also know that conspiracy has its limits, and sometimes you just have to trust a character. I trust Lupin. You trust Snape. Actually I trust Snape too, although I have no doubt he hates Harry with all his heart and enjoys hurting him, but I trust that DD's trust in him will be justified in the end. And I also trust DD not to be a ruthless puppet master. > snip Conspiracy - 1. The action or act of conspiring; a combination of people for an unlawful or reprehensible purpose; an agreement so to combine, a plot. 2. In a neutral or good sense: combination for one purpose. (OED) It seems to me that these two definitions cover most of the fundamentals of what's happened in the Potterverse throughout the 5 books so far. The DEs fit nicely into category 1., as do more or less any of their actions or plans. The Order and Dumbledore's Army fit nicely into category 2. In fact I don't think you're discussing conspiracy at all, you're agreeing to disagree about any character assessments and interpretations that you don't like. Hmm. Is this a conspiracy on your part? Who cares? Not I. But it does provide an opportunity to slide into a look at the most interesting life-form associated with HP - the Fans With Opinions. Personally, I have absolutely no wish to try and persuade anyone to change their mind, but I do enjoy suggesting alternatives to the general consensus, it fits with one of my basic tenets of life - the majority is usually wrong. Either that or they've misunderstood the question and got it right by accident. How dare they! Fortunately, if you're a fan there's no requirement to take anyone else's opinions or views into consideration; dismiss them as facile, ridiculous, boring, repetitive. No problem. After all, why bother about what anyone else thinks? They're obviously mistaken. Aren't they? Hasn't each of us been granted an exclusive insight into the inner depths/shallows of HP, enough so we can definitively state "He's wrong." I expect that from some members every time I post. Fair enough. In fact, it's an exercise I go through myself every time I sign onto the board. Most of us do, I think; a quick look at what's been posted and who by. "Oh God. So-and-so's still vapouring on about whatsisname. They're talking through their hat again. Give it a miss." It can certainly save an awful lot of time - time I can spend more productively wondering what the author is up to in this or that particular passage, what's she trying to hide now? It helps that the Fans're a remarkably diverse and motley crew. Don't like that idea that's just been posted? No worries, there'll be another along in a minute. There's something for everyone. Fan age range covers 6 decades, maybe more; both sexes (though this site seems to have a preponderance of females); all sorts of backgrounds and life experiences; different personal beliefs and philosophies and, perhaps the most fascinating of differences - what they get from the books and what they expect from the books. Now if you're one of the large number concerned with/about Harry, then you've lost me. The adult characters interest me most. I find Character!Harry boring, the other kids only marginally better. Oh, I've tried, but without success. Recently I put up posts on Hermione, Ron and Harry, partly because up to now I've largely ignored them as individuals (as opposed to dissecting the situations that Jo puts them in), and partly to see if I could find something to spark some enthusiasm for them. I Failed. Utterly. Probably the most bland and anodyne posts I've ever sent to the board. Space filler stuff. Even so a few fans emailed off-site to say they enjoyed them. I didn't have the heart to reply telling them how depressing they were to write. Mind you, there were still others that mailed wondering if Kneasy was getting soft in his old age. Nice to have a reputation. This highlights one of the big divisions in fandom; those that are happy with what the books have presented to them so far in the way of perceived characterisation and story-arc - and the others, the awkward squad, the ones who love rummaging around for unconsidered trifles that can be cobbled together to construct a different perspective. It's no secret which side of the divide I'm on. Characters and plot in flux is much more interesting than stability IMO - and there's an extra benefit - I've no illusions to be shattered. I'm an equal opportunity misanthropist. Oh, there's the possibility of disappointment in the eventual resolution and how it's handled, but I've made no big investment in saying "This is how he/she/it must be, it's obvious." Obvious? With JKR? Surely you jest. Mind you, for most posters there is an in-built touch of schizophrenia; for while they all agree that there are/will be plot and character surprises it's accepted that this will not apply to the characters that they have 'adopted,' so to speak; particularly if they have appeared as a sympathetic type up to now. While baddies may achieve redemption, it's considered impossible that the apparently good should go bad. I wonder why? Strangely, though those that propose theories regarding actions or as yet unrevealed motivations based on concrete events are often chided for going beyond the limits of canon, this rarely applies whenever the fraught and extremely woolly subjects of 'abuse' or 'morality' are raised. All bets are off, posters pile in with "Of course, as an abused child, he would..." Excuse me? What is more fanciful than projecting Real World, and for the most part anecdotal evidence, on to the fictional product of one woman's mind? Harry has a thoroughly miserable time at least once every book - so what? I ask. Because that leads on to a very interesting question - why is Harry being made to suffer so much? I presume there's a reason (unless JKR has a *very* mean streak or is channeling C. Dickens), but I've yet to see any post contemplating that all this suffering may be either necessary or even beneficial in the long run. Or even (dare I say it) largely imaginary. There aren't many teenagers who aren't convinced that at least some adults are against them - and what we see is generally just Harry's POV. No doubt all will be explained in due course, to the satisfaction of some and the dismay of others. Yes, the ending; how will it go? Another Fan divide here - more than one in fact. Fluffy or non-fluffy? Harry lives - or dies? The magic goes away or the WW reforms? Evil defeated, good triumphant or something a bit more ambiguous and equivocal? Or cherry-pick from any of the above? Or maybe he's dreamt it all after falling from the school roof. We'll agree to disagree, shall we? Kneasy From dk59us at yahoo.com Mon Nov 8 18:36:04 2004 From: dk59us at yahoo.com (Eustace_Scrubb) Date: Mon, 08 Nov 2004 18:36:04 -0000 Subject: When were the Longbottoms attacked? (was Re: Did the Potters know the prophecy?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117424 Eustace Scrubb said:(re: how people knew so quickly that LV was gone:) > >(even more snipping) > > Now as to the effect of LV's defeat on the Dark Mark and > > on the DEs, I suspect that those folks _would_ have had an > > instantaneous notice that the boss was gone...But I also > > think that this makes it even more likely that the LeStrange gang > > went after the Longbottoms soon after Godric's Hollow...I really > > doubt they waited weeks or months to try to find LV. > > Ginger replies: > I'd agree on that last part except for Sirius' description in GoF > of the Longbottom incident. When the trio visits him in the cave, > they start talking about young Barty. Sirius says, (ch.27, p.527 > US paperback) "Crouch's son was caught with a group of Death Eaters > who'd managed to talk their way out of Azkaban. Apparently they > were trying to find Voldemort and return him to power." > > Sirius was in Azkaban within a couple days of LV's demise. Since > Bella was his cousin, he'd have taken special notice of her arrival > compared to the arrivals of strangers or near strangers. I would > think that talking one's way out of Azkaban would take a bit of > time. Eustace_Scrubb again: Hmmm, more canon to ponder! I'd forgotten that Sirius said the LeStranges had to escape Azkaban to search for Voldemort. But what does this mean for the timing of events? Well, we know Sirius was sent to Azkaban without trial. Do we know it was within a few days? This statement in GoF seems oddly guarded and I wonder whether that's part of JKR's development of Sirius as a character more than anything else. I agree with you that Sirius would have taken notice of his cousin Bellatrix had he seen her either coming or going from Azkaban (and apparently he saw both, as he would have been there when she was returned there too). Yet he doesn't tell the trio who the others caught with Crouch were, only that Crouch Jr. "was definitely caught in the company of people I'd bet my life were Death Eaters." Now he's saying this at a time when he knew perfectly well that Bellatrix, Rodolphus and Rabastan are Death Eaters who were again sent to Azkaban; he tells Harry so in OoP, Ch. 6. Were the LeStranges in Azkaban _before_ Voldemort's encounter with Harry or were they picked up afterwards? It seems that Bellatrix at least simply can't stop being herself...no matter where she is or what the situation, she _has_ to proclaim her loyalty to her master. I just find it difficult to imagine her claiming she was under an Imperius curse, based on what we know of her personality and her fanatical devotion to Voldemort. Unless...she was able to "talk" to the Dementors directly and somehow played on their potential as allies to Voldemort. Another possibility is that Sirius' sense of the passage of time and the order of events was clouded while he was in Azkaban and that we should not take this testimony as established truth. We know he was able to survive in Azkaban because he could transform. But clearly he was traumatized by the place, just not to the point of death or total insanity. So, while this is certainly canon that could change the timing of some potentially important events, the interpretation of this passage isn't completely clear--at least not to me. Cheers, Eustace_Scrubb From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Mon Nov 8 18:37:47 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Mon, 08 Nov 2004 18:37:47 -0000 Subject: Harry's questions ... parents - Dangerous Questions In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117425 > Julia replies: snip. > This is Harry's attitude and character which prevent him from being > an abused child... > Alla: Sorry, I disagree. I judge the abuse based on the actions and intent of Dursleys, not on how strong Harry resilience is. After all, many of us agree that first books were much more fairy tale like and the hero is supposed to be more resilient to the evil outside forces than the usual child. Are you saying that if child manages to escape of the abusive household relatively unharmed in RL, it means that he was not abused? Since Rowling moved in much more realistic depiction in OOP, while not completely abandoning fairy tale plot, I'd say Dursleys are guilty, guilty, guilty. The case for neglect is the easiest to prove, the case for abuse is also quite strong, IMO. They put him in the cupboard, they starved him, they sometimes hit him (I thought they did not, but somebody brought a quote recently,so I will look it up). Yeah, I'd say he was abused. From willsonkmom at msn.com Mon Nov 8 18:47:47 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Mon, 08 Nov 2004 18:47:47 -0000 Subject: Unreliable narrator (was: Snape's stalling) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117427 Kneasy wrote: (but I snipped most of it) > Yes, the ending; how will it go? > Another Fan divide here - more than one in fact. > Fluffy or non-fluffy? > Harry lives - or dies? > The magic goes away or the WW reforms? > Evil defeated, good triumphant or something a bit more ambiguous and > equivocal? > Or cherry-pick from any of the above? > > Or maybe he's dreamt it all after falling from the school roof. > > We'll agree to disagree, shall we? > Potioncat: Fluffy, obviously. Of course, to JKR, Fluffy is a three-headed dog with lots of big teeth. Dreamt it all? I've heard that before, but why is it now that I'm picturing Snape, Dumbledore and Lupin, all dressed as Muggles, leaning over the recovering Harry as he says,"But you were there! You were a scarcrow,and you were a tin man...." Book 6 will be the first book I've read after becoming a true Potterhead. (My daughter's term of endearment.) I hope I haven't adopted too many firmly set expectations, and that I can just enjoy the book as written. So far there have always been pleasant surprises and unpleasant surprises, but no disappointments. From willsonkmom at msn.com Mon Nov 8 18:52:17 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Mon, 08 Nov 2004 18:52:17 -0000 Subject: When were the Longbottoms attacked? (was Re: Did the Potters know the prophecy?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117428 Ginger wrote: When the trio visits him in the cave, > > they start talking about young Barty. Sirius says, (ch.27, p.527 > > US paperback) "Crouch's son was caught with a group of Death Eaters > > who'd managed to talk their way out of Azkaban. Apparently they > > were trying to find Voldemort and return him to power." > > > > Sirius was in Azkaban within a couple days of LV's demise. Since > > Bella was his cousin, he'd have taken special notice of her arrival > > compared to the arrivals of strangers or near strangers. I would > > think that talking one's way out of Azkaban would take a bit of > > time. > Potioncat: Hope I've snipped this in a way that makes sense. I take the phrase "...managed to talk their way out of Azkaban." to mean that they were never sent to Azkaban. Perhaps picked up for questioning, let go, then captured after the Longbottom incident. I can't imagine how they could have incarcerated and let go. Of course, I've been wrong before. From tim at marvinhold.com Mon Nov 8 18:58:46 2004 From: tim at marvinhold.com (Tim) Date: Mon, 08 Nov 2004 18:58:46 -0000 Subject: When were the Longbottoms attacked? (was Re: Did the Potters know the prophecy?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117429 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "potioncat" wrote: > Potioncat: > Hope I've snipped this in a way that makes sense. > > I take the phrase "...managed to talk their way out of Azkaban." to > mean that they were never sent to Azkaban. Perhaps picked up for > questioning, let go, then captured after the Longbottom incident. I > can't imagine how they could have incarcerated and let go. > > Of course, I've been wrong before. I don't have my books at work, but I believe Sirius was the first person to excape Azkaban. In which case Bella and crew were not imprisoned before the attack on the Longbottoms Tim From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com Mon Nov 8 20:44:42 2004 From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (arrowsmithbt) Date: Mon, 08 Nov 2004 20:44:42 -0000 Subject: Unreliable narrator (was: Snape's stalling) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117430 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Nora Renka" wrote: >snip> > The conspiracy theorists were having a lot of fun with Mark Evans, as > were we all--how could such a concrete detail amount to nothing? > Pretty easily, it seems. > That they did - but I wasn't one of 'em; it was too much against repeated canon ("only relatives"). However, you'll notice that JKR was downright apologetic for 'misleading' the fans; for unthinkingly inserting a name that would generate suspicion. So it had to be corrected ASAP. Which, if you have that sort of mind, gives a back-handed confirmation/admission that there are other little clues that are not misleading but on the contrary could be very informative. Oh joy! Search the canon immediately. Round up the usual suspects. Absence of proof is not proof of absence. Kneasy From khinterberg at yahoo.com Mon Nov 8 21:21:15 2004 From: khinterberg at yahoo.com (khinterberg) Date: Mon, 08 Nov 2004 21:21:15 -0000 Subject: Timing of the prophecy Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117432 Why have people agreed that the prophecy was given shortly before Harry and Neville's births? Trelawney was hired 16 years ago from the beginning of Ootp. As Harry is 15 there, wouldn't it have been given a full year before they were born? khinterberg From bboyminn at yahoo.com Mon Nov 8 21:22:20 2004 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Mon, 08 Nov 2004 21:22:20 -0000 Subject: Harry's questions ... parents - Dangerous Questions In-Reply-To: <20041108142540.26102.qmail@web53104.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117433 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Magda Grantwich wrote: > --- Steve wrote: > > > When ever this comes up, I bring up the same point. I really don't > > think people are giving enough weight to the fact that Harry was > > raised in an abusive and oppressive household. Yes, people > > acknowledge that, but I don't think they make enough of an effort > > to look at the underlying psychology. > > > > Living in a household like this is like living with an armed bomb > > that has a hair-trigger; ... > > > > An abusive household is also irrational, there is no logic or > > reason to what sets off the abuser. ... > > > > Steve/bboyminn (was bboy_mn) > > The Dursleys are nobody's nominees for "Guardians of the Year" but > they're not abusive in the sense that Steve refers to above. ... > bboyminn: First, and I thought it was clear, I was speaking of abusive situations in general. In a sense, I wasn't defining Harry's circumstances specifically, I was defining a catagory of circumstance. A catagory in which I believe Harry falls, althought I admit he doesn't fall at the most extreme end of that catagory. Harry isn't abuse? So, Petunia attempting to hit him in the head with a frying pan doesn't count as a sign of abuse, apparently because she missed. That fact that she has him put in a full days work, and fed him only a couple pieces of toast early in the day, and a small piece of cheeze and some stale bread at the end of the day would be regarded as sufficient food. Vernon threatened to knock the stuffing out of Harry and clearly meant it. Dudley is referred to as frequently using Harry as his favorite punching bag, not to mention kicking Harry on occassion, as well as engaging in other physical abuse. Harry is forced to live in a closet despite the presents of a spare bedroom. Harry talks about having had to go without food for significant periods of time as punishment. Many times Vernon raises his hand in threat of physical punishment that I think we can reasonable assume implies actual occurances of physical punishment of the page. If nothing else, even in the unlikely event that Vernon doesn't physically punish him in ways that are out of proportion to what Harry may have done, there is the element of psychological abuse. Vernon overbearing unreasonable anger can create a hostile, intimidating, oppressive, and threatening environment. Harry is denied food, denied friends; his presents is suppressed and oppressed in every way. These are classic ploys by abusers to keep their victim as helpless, dependant, vulnerable, isolated, and made to feel as worthless as possible. >Magda continues: > > I don't think Harry would qualify as an "abused child" in any legal > or clinical sense of the word in the backstory of the series. He > was definitely a neglected child, and that is bad enough. Not until > locked him in his room with not enough food everyday did he become > an abused child (in COS). > > Magda bboyminn: Oh please, in this day and age, and even in the early and middle 1990's when the story takes place, kids are considered abused and neglected for far less than the Dursleys have done. In fact, if child protection/social services found out about the Dursleys, they would have a field day. So again, the points I made about abuse were a generalization used to illustrate how and why abused kids act the way they do. While the illustration referred to the most extreme cases, I think it validly illustrates and explains Harry's case; in other words, Harry falls into that catagory. However, all that said, I agree with Del, who posted earlier in this thread, Harry is growning up and in the process is growing more defiant of the Dursley authority. In fact I would say with confidence that as of OotP, the Dursley have very little affect on or control over Harry. In the last few years Harry as faced far worse threads than Dudley or Uncle Vernon. At this stage the Dursleys are starting to look pretty pathetic to him, and clearly, he's not even remotely intimidated by Dudley anymore. While Harry can never fully escape the effects of his early life, he has none the less become a strong, capable, self-determined, confident individual. To echo Del, even in my book, Harry has run out of excuses. He's not a shy little boy anymore, and I think the lose of Sirius is going to motivate Harry to claim the answers to all those questions he now realizes he should have asked. As to why Harry came out of it as well as he did, I think several things come into play. First, Harry is a wizard, and wizards in general are extremely resilient people. Harry was loved during a very early and critical stage of his life. Harry is extremely intelligent, and as an example, as abusive as Dudley may have been to Harry, Harry is able to out smart him ...and out run him. Harry is an extremely strong person, he as strength of will and strength of character. And among other things, he's stubborn as a mule. I think that's one reason Ron and Harry get along so well, they are both stubborn and bull-headed. This give Harry additional strength at resisting the oppression of the Dursleys. There relationship has become a /war/ that Harry is fiercely determined to win; he will never let them get him down. He will never let them say he is worthless, because he's not, even if he doesn't know why he's not. In addition, I think Harry, deep down, carries some traces of his earlier good life, and small and distant as they are, they help sustain him. Although it's not shown clearly, it's also possible that Harry, especially in his early life, has a rich fantasy life filled with dreams of wizards, dragons, and giants on flying motorcycles that give him an escape for the oppression of his external life. It was just a thought. Steve/bboyminn (was bboy_mn) From dk59us at yahoo.com Mon Nov 8 21:40:11 2004 From: dk59us at yahoo.com (Eustace_Scrubb) Date: Mon, 08 Nov 2004 21:40:11 -0000 Subject: Timing of the prophecy In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117434 khinterberg wrote: > > Why have people agreed that the prophecy was given shortly before > Harry and Neville's births? Trelawney was hired 16 years ago from the > beginning of Ootp. As Harry is 15 there, wouldn't it have been given > a full year before they were born? > Eustace_Scrubb: Isn't it in the last chapter of OoP that Dumbledore says he heard the prophecy 16 years ago? That would be much closer to Harry's 16th birthday than to his 15th. Dumbledore isn't precise about the timing, but it was cold and wet, so let's say early spring/late winter, 16 years ago. That might make it 4 or 5 months prior to Neville's and Harry's births. Not sure whether that's "shortly before" or not. Cheers, Eustace_Scrubb From foxmoth at qnet.com Mon Nov 8 22:11:10 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Mon, 08 Nov 2004 22:11:10 -0000 Subject: Harry's questions about his parents (was Harry, Hermione, Sirius, and the Dr In-Reply-To: <20041107131345.13459.qmail@web53110.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117435 Magda: > My annoyance with Harry over the whole curiosity issue has grown so much that it interferes with my willingness to see him as an attractive character. I'm starting to think he's just dumb in a lot of ways.< Pippin: He's not dumb. But he's done more than teach himself not to ask questions. When it comes to his parents, he's taught himself not to feel curious. We get a window into this process in PoA, where he feels guilty for wanting to hear his parents' voices. Harry didn't do this consciously, of course, so he's not aware of this repressed curiosity. All he knows is that when someone wants to talk about his parents, he gets the urge to change the subject quickly. When information does come his way, he jumps on it like a starving dog with a bone, but he won't look for it. There's the added complication in OOP that he knows Molly never wants him to hear anything that will upset him, and he doesn't want to create more tension between her and Sirius. Pippin From jlnbtr at yahoo.com Mon Nov 8 00:22:58 2004 From: jlnbtr at yahoo.com (Juli) Date: Sun, 7 Nov 2004 16:22:58 -0800 (PST) Subject: Apparition lessons (was Re: Draco's POV?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041108002258.74333.qmail@web53101.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 117436 > Andrea: > > One thing I've wondered is how students about to > > come of age learn to apparate. > > catkind: > Also, all the students will be turning 17 at > different points in the year, so when would > the lessons start? Juli now: Maybe there are classes at the beginning of their 6th or 7th year at Hogwarts, depending on when they turn 17, I think it may be just like broom-flying lessons thay had a few at their first year and that's it. Maybe Mme Hooch is the teacher, cause I don't see her doing much during the school year. Juli From jlnbtr at yahoo.com Mon Nov 8 00:58:29 2004 From: jlnbtr at yahoo.com (Juli) Date: Sun, 7 Nov 2004 16:58:29 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Harry's questions about his parents (was Harry, Hermione, Sirius, and the Dream, 2-way mirror) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041108005829.42486.qmail@web53108.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 117437 > Juli wrote (on an earlier post): > "...If I was Harry I would have gotten as much > information as possible about my parents and my > grand-parents, but he didn't. > > Beatnik: (edited) > Another possible reason that Harry doesn't ask > questions about his family, is that it's painful > to hear about the parents and grandparents that > he's never going to have, especially when he can't > change their fates. Harry is an action guy - it > would be very hard for him to learn about something > he cannot change. Consciously, or subconsciously, > he knows this, and so doesn't ask the questions in > the first place. Juli Again: I don't think it's painful to Harry to hear about his family, everytime someone mentions James or Lily he pays a lot of atention and is usually happy abou it (except on OoP when Moody shows him the picture about the original Order), besides he spends hours and hours in front of the mirror of Erised just looking at his parents. Madga wrote: (edited) >Quite definitely weird. I completely agree with >you. And considering all the times Sirius was alone >with Buckbeak (and obviously bummed out if not >clinically depressed) when Harry could have been with >him hearing about his parents and his family....it's >so frustrating. I agree with you when you say Sirius may be clinically depressed, I'm talking from experience here, when I was depressed I spent most of my time alone in my room, just looking at the ceiling, that's exactly what Sirius does, and does anyone care? Nope. Molly says it's melancholy, and Harry just doesn't seem to care, or maybe he does but he never tries anything to lighten up his godfather's mood. Ms. Luna wrote: (edited) >I think that maybe Harry's reasoning for not >finding out about his parents at every opportunity >is he has an idealized picture in his mind of his >family, and is afraid to "mess it up, somehow >"disrespecting" his internal view. Here I go again: Maybe he doesn't want to feel like he felt after the pensive scene, he felt his father was a stranger, he's always heard people say how great he was, and by the way he treated Snape he seemed just mean, but then he did ask questions, maybe for the first time, and once Sirius and Lupin reassured him his father was a great guy he felt at peace again and never again asked. Mmmm, he likes so much the idea of perfect parents, he doesn't want to learn more in order not to ruin it. Alla wrote: >She could get away with it in the beginning with >"Dursleys forbade him ot ask questions, so as abused >kid he subconsciously decided that he would be better >off not asking" or something like that, but he is >fifteen now and had been in Hogwarts for five years. > >I don't think Harry is dumb, but he'd better start >asking in the HBP. :o) I agree with you, Harry no longer acts as an abused child, he's grown up, he's lived for 5 years at a world where almost everyone treats him right, and many people knew his parents. DD for one has always been willing to answer his questions (except "why did LV tried to kill me?" at PS/SS). Alla again on another post: >I welcome any explanation which helps me not to think >of Harrry as stupid. :o) And of course the main reason >is plot dictated. Harry does act a little stupidly sometimes, not asking questions is maybe the dumbest one. I just don't think the abused kid theory is good enough, at least not anymore. As we are just spectors on JKR's story we only know what she wants us to know, maybe he's asked questions and they just haven't been included on the books, why? if we knew everything the next books wouldn't be so interesting and this group wouldn't exist ;) Juli, saying good-bye after answering a lot of posts. From jiggsvelasco at yahoo.com Mon Nov 8 14:53:21 2004 From: jiggsvelasco at yahoo.com (jp velasco) Date: Mon, 8 Nov 2004 06:53:21 -0800 (PST) Subject: The Riddles' Murders (WAS: The only one he ever feared? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041108145321.53318.qmail@web52905.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 117438 Debbie wrote: The only argument that supports the notion that the MoM must have known about it is that if the Improper Use of Magic Office employs countrywide surveillance, Mafalda Hopkirk's predecessor should have picked up on it. But I doubt they keep track of very much, or they would've noticed Mundungus Fletcher disapparating at 4 Privet Drive at the beginning of OOP. JP here: Correct me if I'm wrong but my impression is that the Improper Use of Magic Office does not focus on the use of magic on murders, apparitions etc... I think that the Office focuses on underage magic, use of Muggle artifacts to play practcally jokes or to harm Muggles and such. Even if the magic done by wizards were "bad", it is not "improper" because using magic when your "of age" is allowed and I think that you'll need to get a licence to apparate, so logically, the Office of Improper Use of Magic had not known the Riddle murders because it was simply not their job to monitor them. From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Tue Nov 9 00:37:33 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Tue, 09 Nov 2004 00:37:33 -0000 Subject: Is Harry feeling guilty for being alive ? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117439 While pondering the "Harry doesn't ask questions" thread, I realised that something could explain a lot of things. I'd already read posts saying the same kind of thing, but I had never understood them before. Maybe Harry feels guilty for living, because he feels he killed his parents who loved him, in order to live. Before anyone jumps down my throat, I'm NOT saying that Harry *is* guilty of anything, I'm just saying that he might *feel* that way. That would be the kind of reaction I would expect from an abused kid, who learns some difficult things at a critical age. Harry grew up being told that he was worthless, and then at age 11 he discovers that his parents died in a fight which he survived. It wouldn't seem abnormal to me that he would cristalise all the guilt the Dursleys put on him on this particular event : "I am unworthy because I killed my parents". It's the kind of twisted conclusions kids often come to. It could explain a lot of things. It would explain why he doesn't want to learn about his family (not just his parents by the way, but also his grandparents and all his extended family, and even his parents' friends) : because he doesn't want to remember that his parents died "because of him". It would explain why he doesn't try to learn more about himself : because he's afraid of what he might find (things that would somehow confirm that he killed his parents). It would explain where a part of his heroism comes from : because he feels like every other life is more important than his, since he shouldn't be alive anyway. In his mind, that would be a way of trying to somehow atone for the sin of killing his parents. It would explain why he's feeling so bad over the Prophecy. "Kill or be killed" would remind him of what he feels he *already* did. It would partly explain why he's so angry in OoP : because he reacted badly to Cedric's death, and why at the same time he never dwells on it but dreamed of it many times : because the guilt is unbearable. And the list goes on. That might also be one of the reasons Sirius had to die : so that this guilt will finally come out in the open and be dealt with. The next question would be : why did JKR make him feel guilty to start with ? There could be many reasons, but I can think of 2 main ones. 1. So that he doesn't ask questions she doesn't want answered yet. 2. So that he starts saving people. As SSSusan said, feeling good about something is a positive reinforcement, but Harry had to have a reason to start saving people. This guilt (or rather its consequence : the will to redeem himself) would be it. But now that he knows he's The One, now that he knows his friends will never desert him, now that he knows that he *can* fight LV and his DEs (even if he still has a mighty lot to learn), he doesn't need that guilt anymore : he's got more realistic reasons to engage in the war. In fact, IMO that guilt would be an obstacle in his fight. Harry needs to make decisions based on real solid reasons and facts, not on an irrational guilt. And I feel that in order for his Power (whatever it is) to be totally effective, in order for Harry to really vanquish LV, he has to fight with conscious motives and a clear mind. Del From jlnbtr at yahoo.com Mon Nov 8 16:30:26 2004 From: jlnbtr at yahoo.com (Juli) Date: Mon, 8 Nov 2004 08:30:26 -0800 (PST) Subject: When were the Longbottoms attacked? (was Re: Did the Potters know the prophecy?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041108163026.72933.qmail@web53110.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 117440 --- quigonginger wrote: > > Ginger replies: > I'd agree on that last part except for Sirius' > description in GoF of the Longbottom incident. > When the trio visits him in the cave, they > start talking about young Barty. Sirius says, > (ch.27, p.527 US paperback) "Crouch's son was > caught with a group of Death Eaters who'd > managed to talk their way out of Azkaban. > Apparently they were trying to find Voldemort > and return him to power." Juli: Barty Jr was caught with DEs that managed to stay out of Azkaban, this doesn't mean he wasn't involved in the Longbottoms' torture. Bella & Co were torturing Frank and Alice in order to get some idea where LV was. > Sirius was in Azkaban within a couple days of LV's > demise. Since Bella was his cousin, he'd have taken > special notice of her arrival compared to the arrivals > of strangers or near strangers. I would think that > talking one's way out of Azkaban would take a bit of > time. Yes, but we don't know how long was it between LV going vapor and Bella going to Azkaban, it may have been months, since we know it happened long after LV was gone and everyone felt safe. > Earlier in that same paragraph, Sirius said, "When > Voldemort disappeared, it looked like only a matter > of time until Crouch got the top job" (referring to > Minister). "But then something rather unfortunate > happened." > > It's kind of hard to interpret that paragraph. Crouch > definitely had supporters for his fight against LV and > the DEs; that much is clear. When LV disappeared, > people thought he'd be the next Minister. How long did > it take for them to go from just supporting him to > viewing him as the heir-apparent? Juli: During the entire VWI Crouch was favourite for new MoM, he was a declared enemy of the dark side, he fought fire with fire, but then after LV was gone and Crouch Jr was found hanging out with DE, then his popularity went down. He became a third or fourth for the MoM, we know DD was the first choice, Fudge was the second in line, DD didn't want the job so Fudge got it, and Crouch? Off he goes to the Department of Int'l Cooperation all because his son's a DE. > So Lestrange, party of three, had time to talk their > way out of Azkaban and Barty had time to gather support > for Ministerial candidate between the time Harry > Vapourflected and the time that the Longbottoms were > hit. Sounds like a bit of time to me, but I could > well be reading it wrong. Thoughts? Juli again: I don't think Barty Jr was with the Lestranges when he was caught, he could have been with any other DE but he was convicted with the Lestranges. From ejblack at rogers.com Tue Nov 9 00:39:40 2004 From: ejblack at rogers.com (jcb54me) Date: Tue, 09 Nov 2004 00:39:40 -0000 Subject: Harry's questions/abuse In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117441 Siriusly Snapey Susan wrote: > > In fact, that's one of the things folks have pondered around here > before. WHY/HOW is it that Harry & Tom, both with crappy > upbringings, could have ended up going such different paths and with > such different belief systems? Regardless of the answers to those > questions, the fact that Harry behaves altruistically and Voldy > behaves evilly [wd?] does NOT mean that Harry wasn't bullied or > abused. The "the fact that Harry behaves altruistically and Voldy behaves evilly" question may be answered as simply as two different methods of control. Abused children when they grow up seek power and control over what has happened to them. They either can become abusers in turn, making sure they are in control and the abuse does not happen to THEM, ie Tom/Voldemort trying to run the world, becoming so powerful that no one can harm him, that he is in fact in charge of everything. Or, they can become Harry, controlling the abuse by protecting everyone possible FROM abuse. What was called his need to "save everybody" is possibly quite true. He does feel the need to protect and save, becoming the protector he had wanted, needed, yearned for. From zacksmom3 at bellsouth.net Mon Nov 8 20:16:11 2004 From: zacksmom3 at bellsouth.net (glavgirl) Date: Mon, 08 Nov 2004 20:16:11 -0000 Subject: Department of Mysteries Locked Room Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117442 Glavgirl: Wanted to get your thoughts on the locked room in Department of Mysteries. When Harry is trying to find the right door to enter, he goes to the locked door and tries everything to open it. It was odd that it melted the knife that Sirius had given him. In the end of the book, Dumbledore told Harry that there was a locked room in the Department of Mysteries that holds that power that Harry possess. We know it was his heart that kept Voldemort from possessing him for any amount of time. Any ideas on what "power" is behind the locked door? It would be hard to lock up feelings in a room. Especially something that would melt a knife. From nepenthales at yahoo.com Tue Nov 9 01:26:18 2004 From: nepenthales at yahoo.com (Andrew) Date: Tue, 09 Nov 2004 01:26:18 -0000 Subject: Department of Mysteries Locked Room In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117443 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "glavgirl" wrote: > > Glavgirl: > In the end of the book, Dumbledore told Harry that there was a > locked room in the Department of Mysteries that holds that power > that Harry possess. We know it was his heart that kept Voldemort > from possessing him for any amount of time. Any ideas on > what "power" is behind the locked door? It would be hard to lock > up feelings in a room. Especially something that would melt a > knife. The door has always left me perplexed. Many people (myself included) have surmised from Dumbledore's speech at the end of the book that the "power" in that room is love, or compassion, or some other similar thing. This makes some sense, but it seems incomplete or somehow only partially realized to me. The question that comes to my mind when I read the passages about the door isn't about what is beyond it. I'm more interested in knowing *why is the door locked*. There is apparently some significant interest in keeping the contents of this room under lock and key, but why? What in this room is more dangerous or important than the veil in the Death Chamber, the time-turners, and the prophecies? -Nepenthales Who really should be working. From susanadacunha at gmx.net Tue Nov 9 01:25:49 2004 From: susanadacunha at gmx.net (Susana Cunha) Date: Tue, 9 Nov 2004 01:25:49 -0000 Subject: Harry's questions about his parents (was Harry, Hermione, Sirius, and the Dream, 2-way mirror) References: <20041107131345.13459.qmail@web53110.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <004a01c4c5fb$9bc0bf20$0a2f0dd4@taxi> No: HPFGUIDX 117444 Juli wrote: > During Christmas at GP Harry > wanted to tell Sirius not to worry that it was OK > getting oclumency lessons with Snape, but he didn't he > found plenty of time to talk to Ron and Hermione, but > not 5 minutes to talk to his godfather. It just bugs > me, why didn't they talked? If I was Harry I would > have gotten as much information as possible about my > parents and my grand-parents, but he didn't. I don't > think he even knows his grand-parents name. He's never > asked anyone were his money came from. Nothing, he > doesn't seem to want to know anything at all. Magda wrote: >>I was particularly annoyed when Snape comes to tell Harry about occlumency lessons and Molly finds him - where? getting the lowdown on his grandparents from Sirius? talking to Remus about what is was like at school with James? No, he's playing chess with Ron. Like he never seens Ron for 10 months of the flipping year anyway. And when this dormant curiosity of his does have its annual flare up, is he at 12GP where he can exercise it with Sirius? Or in the library so he can look up references to his own history (like Hermione did before she got on the Hogwarts Express in PS/SS)? No, he's in Snape's office and sticks his head into a pensieve - which he still doesn't know how to get out of.<< --------------------------- Yes, it seems strange at first sight. But you need to remember where he's coming from. The kind of reaction he would probably provoke on his uncle and aunt with questions about his parents would leave a mark in a young child. He grew up learning that it was *wrong* to talk about his roots. I'm more concern about what Juli wrote: he didn't talk to Sirius at all! Not about his parents, nor anything! Maybe he was jus being a teenager (thinking he had all the time in the world; not wanting to have a serious talk) but it bugs me a lot more than his lack of curiosity, correction, his lack of will to talk about his parents (he does seem curious, but he doesn't ask). I'd ex pect him to run around Sirius like a puppy whenever he had the chance. On the other hand, we don't know if he didn't. Maybe he did off page. Maybe CliniclyDepressed!Sirius wanted to prove Molly he didn't mistake Harry for his father and put some extra adult-teenager distance between them (that sounds a lot like the Sirius I know - but that's just me). ----------------------------- Magda wrote: >>My annoyance with Harry over the whole curiosity issue has grown so much that it interferes with my willingness to see him as an attractive character. I'm starting to think he's just dumb in a lot of ways.<< ---------------------------- Well, if he got into Snape's pensive without knowing how to get out I'll have to agree with you! But, really, he wouldn't! He probably found out after the accident with DD's pensive. I know we never see him lingering in technical details like Hermione does, but we are only told the interesting plot (though I'd be terribly interested in technical details - but that's just me). He did seem to know a lot more about DADA than the other students. I can only assume he *does* look things up in books or, at the very least, asks Hermione. But, of course, he is dumb in a lot of ways, we all are! He's human. Susana who realized after writing this post that Steve/bboyminn explained her point of view much thoroughly. From jlnbtr at yahoo.com Tue Nov 9 02:22:25 2004 From: jlnbtr at yahoo.com (Juli) Date: Mon, 8 Nov 2004 18:22:25 -0800 (PST) Subject: Department of Mysteries Locked Room In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041109022225.166.qmail@web53101.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 117445 --- Andrew wrote: > The door has always left me perplexed. Many people > (myself included) have surmised from Dumbledore's > speech at the end of the book that the "power" in > that room is love, or compassion, or some other > similar thing. This makes some sense, but it seems > incomplete or somehow only partially realized to me. > > I'm more interested in knowing *why is the door > locked*. There is apparently some significant > interest in keeping the contents of this room under > lock and key, but why? My 2 knuts: Maybe this power, whatever it is doesn't have a form, a shape, a physical form, just like air or something, so in order to study it, it must be kept locked in a room, place or container, otherwise it would get lost. I don't think the reason it's locked is because it's more dangerous or important than the other rooms. It is dangerous and important in its own way. Juli From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Tue Nov 9 02:59:45 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Tue, 09 Nov 2004 02:59:45 -0000 Subject: Dursleys abuse Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117446 Your Honor. Ladies and Gentlemen of the Jury. It is the prosecution position that Petunia and Vernon Dursleys should be found guilty of abuse and /or neglect of their nephew Harry Potter. According to testimony of Mr. Potter's Dursleys made him live in the cupboard, dressed him in the old clothes, starved him continuously and even attempted to hit him. Dursleys' favourite punishment was locking Mr. Potter in the cupboard with little or no food at all to go on with. According to Mr. Potter Dursleys also failed to protect him from school bullies. Moreover, their son actively participated in such activities. Let me read to you a few excerpts from Mr. Potter's testimony. "Dudley had laughed himself silly at Harry, who spent a sleepless night imagining school the next day, where he was already laughed at for his baggy clothes and taped glasses. 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 had tried to explain that he couldn't explain how it had grown back so quickly." - PS/SS, p.24, paperback. "Harry lay in his dark cupboard much later wishing he had a watch. He didn't know what time it was and he couldn't be sure the Dursleys were asleep yet. Until they were, he couldn't risk sneaking to the kitchen for some food" - PS/SS, p.29, paperback. "Harry was glad school was over, but there was no escaping Dudley's gang, who visited the house every single day. Piers , Dennis, Malcolm, and Gordon were all big and stupid, but as Dudley was the biggest and stupidest of the lot, he was the leader. The rest of them were all quite happy to join in Dudley's favorite sport: Harry Hunting" - PS/SS , p.31, paperback. "Harry paid dearly for his moment of fun. As neither Dudley nor the hedge was in any way hurt, Aunt Petunia knew he hadn't really done magic, but he still had to duck as she aimed a heavy blow at his head with the soapy frying pan. Then she gave him work to do, with the promise he wouldn't eat again until he'd finished. While Dudley lolled around watching and eating ice cream, Harry cleaned the windows, washed the car, mowed the lawn, trimmed the flowerbeds, pruned and watered the roses, and repainted the garden bench. The sun blazed overhead, burning the back of his neck." - CoS, paperback, p.10. "And laughing like a maniac, he dragged Harry back upstairs. Uncle Vernon was as bad as his word. The following morning, he paid a man to fit bars on Harry's window. He himself fitted a cat-flap in the bedroom door, so small amounts of food could be pushed inside three times a day. They let Harry out to use the bathroom morning and evening. Otherwise, he was locked in his room around the clock. ......... The cat-flap rattled and Aunt petunia's hand appeared, pushing a bowl of canned soup into the room. Harry, whose insides were aching with hunger, jumped off his bed and seized it. The soup was stone- cold, but he drank half of it in one gulp. Then he crossed the room of Hedwig's cage and tipped the soggy vegetables att he bottom of the bowl into her empty food tray. She ruffled her feathers and gave him a look of deep disgust. "It's no good turning your beak up at it - that's all we've got." said Harry grimly. He put the empty bowl back on the floor next to the cat-flap and lay back down on the bed, somehow even hungrier than he had been before the soup." - CoS, p.22, paperback. "He was working flat-out just to get through all their homework, though he made a point of sending regular food packages up to the cave in the mountain for Sirius; after last summer , Harry had not forgotten what it felt like to be continually hungry." - GoF , paperback, p.548. Ladies and Gentlemen of the Jury, you also heard testimony of several friends and acquaintances of Mr. Potter, who were clearly aware of the fact that his aunt and uncle were mistreating him and attempted to interfere on his behalf. "We thought we'd just have a few words with you about Harry" said Mr. Weasley, still smiling. "Yeah," growled Moody, "About how he's treated when he is at your place" - OOP, paperback, p.869. You also heard the testimony of Albus Dumbledore, who perhaps should be charged as accomplice in those crimes, but for now prosecution is investigating whether his claim that Harry could only survive with Dursleys is in any way correct "You had suffered. I knew you would when I left you on your aunt and uncle's doorstep. I knew I was condemning you to ten dark and difficult years. " - OOP, paperback, p.835. Ladies and Gentlemen, we ask you to find that Dursleys are guilty of the above mentioned crimes. P.S. Strangely enough, I tried to think about any possible defense of Dursleys and ... well, I failed. It is very easy for me to imagine the defense of Snape. For Dursleys, well, I see none. One can say that Dursleys did not ask for Harry to be brought to live with them. True, they did not. But to me, the sister does have some kind of obligation to take care of her orphan nephew if necessary, so this defense does not sit well with me, either. I do suspect that JKR may redeem Petunia, but for now I really, really dislike all Dursleys. :o) From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Tue Nov 9 03:05:51 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Tue, 09 Nov 2004 03:05:51 -0000 Subject: Tom Riddle In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117447 Catlady wrote: > But then how did he [Tom Riddle] become so certain that his father deserted his mother because he found out that she was a witch? Surely someone must have told him -- who? > > As for finding out that he was the last descendent of Slytherin, that probably didn't take MUCH research -- if he knew his mother's maiden name, he could have looked it up in genealogy books in Hogwarts > Library. If he didn't know his mother's maiden name, he could have > found it out from someone who had known her or known of her -- someone who heard the name 'Tom Riddle' and said "That was the loathsome Muggle that dear Marvella fell in love with" or heard the name 'Marvolo' and asked: "Are you related to Marvolo Last-Blood?" Carol responds: Maybe Tom knew nothing about wizards (except for his own strange powers) until he got his Hogwarts letter and whoever delivered it (Dumbledore? the deputy headmaster or deputy headmistress?) explained to him that his mother was a witch but his father was a Muggle. The story about his mother being deserted by his father and even the identity of his father could have been given to him by a sympathetic Muggle employee of the orphanage--I don't think that Tom's power to charm people into telling him what he wanted was limited to Wizards. As for his mother's heritage, he could simply have asked Dumbledore or his Head of House for information about his grandfather Marvolo, including Marvolo's surname. (Surely Dumbledore would have encountered Marvolo as a student at some point, or would be aware of him if he was at all famous as a Dark Wizard, and maybe he felt both sympathy and hope for the talented little boy from the Muggle orphanage.) Whatever Tom found out would have sent him to do research in the library and he could easily have discovered that Marvolo was a descendant of Salazar Slytherin, which in turn would have led to information about the Chamber of Secrets. (Being a model student, Tom could easily have obtained permission for further study in the restricted section of the library.) Anyway, I agree that information about Marvolo would have been easy to obtain, and if he sensed that any adult wizard (say Dumbledore) was withholding information, that in itself would have triggered his curiosity and sent him to the library, where he would have found out everything he wanted to know and more. And once he realized that he could speak Parseltongue, he would have realized that he was the Heir of Slytherin and have begun his five-year search for the Chamber of Secrets. Al this at age eleven. Carol, wondering when Tom realized that he was a natural Legilimens --or, if he wasn't one, who taught him and why From snow15145 at yahoo.com Tue Nov 9 03:17:57 2004 From: snow15145 at yahoo.com (snow15145) Date: Tue, 09 Nov 2004 03:17:57 -0000 Subject: Department of Mysteries Locked Room In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117448 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Andrew" wrote: > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "glavgirl" > wrote: > > > > Glavgirl: > > In the end of the book, Dumbledore told Harry that there was a > > locked room in the Department of Mysteries that holds that power > > that Harry possess. We know it was his heart that kept Voldemort > > from possessing him for any amount of time. Any ideas on > > what "power" is behind the locked door? It would be hard to lock > > up feelings in a room. Especially something that would melt a > > knife. > > The door has always left me perplexed. Many people (myself included) > have surmised from Dumbledore's speech at the end of the book that > the "power" in that room is love, or compassion, or some other > similar thing. This makes some sense, but it seems incomplete or > somehow only partially realized to me. > > The question that comes to my mind when I read the passages about the > door isn't about what is beyond it. I'm more interested in knowing > *why is the door locked*. There is apparently some significant > interest in keeping the contents of this room under lock and key, but > why? What in this room is more dangerous or important than the veil > in the Death Chamber, the time-turners, and the prophecies? > > -Nepenthales > Who really should be working. Snow: Could it be that the door is locked out of protection? Is this symbolized by the way Harry (the one who has so much of the power within this room) is locked away from the wizarding world in a closet under the stairs in a muggle home protected by his mother's sacrifice and compounded with Dumbledore's added protection? From antoshachekhonte at yahoo.com Tue Nov 9 03:29:47 2004 From: antoshachekhonte at yahoo.com (antoshachekhonte) Date: Tue, 09 Nov 2004 03:29:47 -0000 Subject: Every Tom, Dick and Harry... Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117449 Antosha: A very random and possibly pointless thought occurred to me today. Could there be any significance in the fact that the two antagonists in this series both have what would normally be considered nicknames? We know that Tom Riddle is really a Tom, not a Thomas or Tomas because of his ridiculous little anagram. If he were more than just a Tom, he'd have to stick an extra 'h', 'a', and 's' into "I am Lord Voldemort." Harry, while somewhat more common as a given name, is also typically a nickname for Harold or Henry. Any significance? Am I just lacking sleep? From dk59us at yahoo.com Tue Nov 9 03:38:58 2004 From: dk59us at yahoo.com (Eustace_Scrubb) Date: Tue, 09 Nov 2004 03:38:58 -0000 Subject: When were the Longbottoms attacked? (was Re: Did the Potters know the prophecy?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117450 Potioncat: > > Hope I've snipped this in a way that makes sense. > > > > I take the phrase "...managed to talk their way out of Azkaban." > > to mean that they were never sent to Azkaban. Perhaps picked up > > for questioning, let go, then captured after the Longbottom > > incident. I can't imagine how they could have incarcerated and > > let go. Then Tim: > I don't have my books at work, but I believe Sirius was the first > person to escape Azkaban. > In which case Bella and crew were not imprisoned before the attack > on the Longbottoms. Now Eustace_Scrubb: I agree that Potioncat's interpretation of the phrase could indeed mean that they weren't sent to Azkaban that time, anyway. On the other hand, if they _were_ in Azkaban, and they _did_ talk their way out somehow, that might not count as an "escape." For now, I'll stick to a theory that I raised in Message #117424 a few posts up, that Sirius may not correctly recall the timing and order of events that occurred during his imprisonment. And I'll hope fervently that the vagaries of his recollections in GoF as compared to what he says in OoP (and to other canon) aren't just a result of a change in authorial direction or something! Cheers, Eustace_Scrubb "The trouble with normal is it always gets worse!"--Bruce Cockburn. From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Tue Nov 9 04:21:46 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Tue, 09 Nov 2004 04:21:46 -0000 Subject: Why has DD never suggested Snape thank Harry? (Was: Why has DD never suggest In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117451 Pippin: > >> Second year they got special awards for services to the school, which includes Snape, and fourth year Snape stood and drank in > > honor of Harry, or so we are given to understand. It was only > > some of those at the Slytherin table who we're told did not. Alla: > > If he indeed drank to Harry in GoF, it counts for something, since > nobody was coerced to stand up, but again we did not see it Carol: We do at least know that Snape was present at that ceremony and that he stood up for Cedric Diggory: "Further along the table, sitting next to Professor McGonagall, was Snape. His eyes lingered on Harry for a moment as Harry looked at him. His expression was difficult to read" (GoF Am. ed. 720). (Note who he's sitting next to!) When Dumbledore tells them to raise their glasses to Cedric Diggory, the narrator informs us: "They did it, all of them; the benches scraped as everyone in the hall stood, and raised their goblets, and echoed, in one loud, low, rumbling voice, 'Cedric Diggory!'" (721). This passage is the first hopeful sign of unity among all the Hogwarts staff and students, and the Beauxbatons and Durmstrang students as well. Karkaroff has fled, but Snape is present, and raises his glass with the rest. Whether he does the same with Harry is less clear: "Dumbledore turned gravely to Harry and raised his goblet once more. Nearly everyone in the Great Hall followed suit. They murmured his name, as they had murmured Cedric's and drank to him. But through a gap in the standing figures, Harry saw that Malfoy, Crabbe, Goyle, and many other of the Slytherins had remained defiantly in their seats, their goblets untouched. Dumbledore, who after all, possessed no magical eye, did not see them" (723). The implication is that Draco and a few other Slytherin students are the only ones who do not drink to Harry Harry. Dumbledore can't see them, but he would almost certainly have seen Snape out of the corner of his eye had Snape not stood up, and for that reason alone, Ithink Snape would have done so. Moreover, he was sitting next to McGonagall, who also would have noticed and would have firmly disapproved. He was also in full view of all the students. Harry and others would have noticed so marked a departure from protocol. Ron would certainly have remarked on it if Harry didn't. But there is no indication whatever that Snape behaved any differently from McGonagall in this instance. In the absence of evidence to the contrary, I think we can safely assume that Snape did indeed stand and drink to Harry. Carol From khinterberg at yahoo.com Tue Nov 9 05:25:12 2004 From: khinterberg at yahoo.com (khinterberg) Date: Tue, 09 Nov 2004 05:25:12 -0000 Subject: Timing of the prophecy In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117452 > khinterberg wrote: > > > > Why have people agreed that the prophecy was given shortly before > > Harry and Neville's births? Trelawney was hired 16 years ago from > the > > beginning of Ootp. As Harry is 15 there, wouldn't it have been > given > > a full year before they were born? > > > > Eustace_Scrubb: > Isn't it in the last chapter of OoP that Dumbledore says he heard the > prophecy 16 years ago? That would be much closer to Harry's 16th > birthday than to his 15th. Dumbledore isn't precise about the timing, > but it was cold and wet, so let's say early spring/late winter, 16 > years ago. That might make it 4 or 5 months prior to Neville's and > Harry's births. Not sure whether that's "shortly before" or not. > > Cheers, > > Eustace_Scrubb khinterberg now: True, but let me present my evidence. 1.)The HP Lexicon timeline says that Ron is made Gryffindor keeper on Friday, Sep 6. 2.)The whole of the next chapter, Percy and Padfoot, seems to take place in one day, Sat the 7th. 3.)The very next day, Dolores Umbridge is made Hogwarts High Inquisitor and begins inspecting classes. 4.)That very day, Umbridge inspects Professor Trelawney, and Trelawney reluctantly reveals that she has been employed in that post for "nearly sixteen years." The only thing that bothers me is that "nearly." But do you see my point of view? khinterberg From khinterberg at yahoo.com Tue Nov 9 05:29:04 2004 From: khinterberg at yahoo.com (khinterberg) Date: Tue, 09 Nov 2004 05:29:04 -0000 Subject: Timing of the prophecy In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117453 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Eustace_Scrubb" wrote: > > khinterberg wrote: > > > > Why have people agreed that the prophecy was given shortly before > > Harry and Neville's births? Trelawney was hired 16 years ago from > the > > beginning of Ootp. As Harry is 15 there, wouldn't it have been > given > > a full year before they were born? > > > > Eustace_Scrubb: > Isn't it in the last chapter of OoP that Dumbledore says he heard the > prophecy 16 years ago? That would be much closer to Harry's 16th > birthday than to his 15th. Dumbledore isn't precise about the timing, > but it was cold and wet, so let's say early spring/late winter, 16 > years ago. That might make it 4 or 5 months prior to Neville's and > Harry's births. Not sure whether that's "shortly before" or not. > > Cheers, > > Eustace_Scrubb Sorry Eustace, I concede my point. I do understand now. Thank you for the help! khinterberg From hickengruendler at yahoo.de Tue Nov 9 06:06:36 2004 From: hickengruendler at yahoo.de (hickengruendler) Date: Tue, 09 Nov 2004 06:06:36 -0000 Subject: Timing of the prophecy In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117454 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "khinterberg" wrote: > > > khinterberg wrote: > > > > > > Why have people agreed that the prophecy was given shortly before > > > Harry and Neville's births? Trelawney was hired 16 years ago > from > > the > > > beginning of Ootp. As Harry is 15 there, wouldn't it have been > > given > > > a full year before they were born? > > > > > > > Eustace_Scrubb: > > Isn't it in the last chapter of OoP that Dumbledore says he heard > the > > prophecy 16 years ago? That would be much closer to Harry's 16th > > birthday than to his 15th. Dumbledore isn't precise about the > timing, > > but it was cold and wet, so let's say early spring/late winter, 16 > > years ago. That might make it 4 or 5 months prior to Neville's and > > Harry's births. Not sure whether that's "shortly before" or not. > > > > Cheers, > > > > Eustace_Scrubb > > > khinterberg now: > True, but let me present my evidence. > 1.)The HP Lexicon timeline says that Ron is made Gryffindor keeper > on Friday, Sep 6. > 2.)The whole of the next chapter, Percy and Padfoot, seems to take > place in one day, Sat the 7th. > 3.)The very next day, Dolores Umbridge is made Hogwarts High > Inquisitor and begins inspecting classes. > 4.)That very day, Umbridge inspects Professor Trelawney, and > Trelawney reluctantly reveals that she has been employed in that > post for "nearly sixteen years." > > The only thing that bothers me is that "nearly." But do you see my > point of view? > > khinterberg Hickengruendler: I don't think we should take Trelawney's statement to literally. Seh said she worked in Hogwarts for nearly sixteen years in the scene you mentioned, and then again she said that she's in Hogwarts for sixteen years, in the scene where she's sacked. All that it means is IMO that she was hired between October 1979th and April or May 1980. Not a very specific date, but I don't think we can come any closer in our guesses. It's the same about Snape. He said in September/October that he worked in Hogwarts for fourteen years. If we took it literally, he was hired nefore Voldie's downfall. But it's way more likely that he was speaking losely and was hired in November, after Harry defeated Voldemort. That would still count as 14 years, even if not exactly. Hickengruendler From finwitch at yahoo.com Tue Nov 9 06:31:23 2004 From: finwitch at yahoo.com (finwitch) Date: Tue, 09 Nov 2004 06:31:23 -0000 Subject: Department of Mysteries Locked Room In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117455 > Snow: > > Could it be that the door is locked out of protection? Is this > symbolized by the way Harry (the one who has so much of the power > within this room) is locked away from the wizarding world in a closet > under the stairs in a muggle home protected by his mother's sacrifice > and compounded with Dumbledore's added protection? Finwitch: You know - what if it isn't a door but just a wall pretending? That would explain why Harry couldn't open it with Sirius' knife (which IS supposed to open any lock). What ever there is... Maybe something like the fire Akhilleus' mother used to protect her son (she held him by heel, so heel was left vulnerable...) Hmm- AD told Harry his mother's sacrifice lingered in his very skin - perhaps, unlike what Voldemort thinks, it never WAS in Harry's blood... Finwitch From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Tue Nov 9 06:52:27 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Tue, 09 Nov 2004 06:52:27 -0000 Subject: Unreliable narrator (Was: Snape's stalling) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117456 Carol earlier: > > So the narrator, who is *not* Harry, *is* frequently unreliable. If he weren't, we would have known from the outset that Crouch!Moody was a villain in GoF and that Sirius was not really a captive in the MoM in OoP. JKR *needs* an unreliable narrator. > > > > Our view of the other characters, and Snape in particular, *is* limited, and to some degree shaped and conditioned, by Harry's POV. We need to tread carefully, to watch actions as well as listen to words, to distrust what Harry *knows* if it involves another character's feelings or motivations. > > > Neri: > > My problem with the Snape fans is that the "subversive reading" (is > this the term?) always seems to be in ONE direction. Somehow it is > always to make Snape look better than what the way he comes out in the text, never worse. For example, in this post you first write that > Harry's negative estimation of Snape is because of his limited and > biased POV, and we need to distrust it. This is OK by me, but then you go on to disregard a huge time hole in the plot (which Harry doesn't notice!) as "JKR's lack of attention to details". Why? Because it casts the suspicion on Snape? Carol again: I think we're talking at cross purposes here. You're concerned about your timeline, which is only tangentially related to my argument. (I think it's probably an indication that JKR's scenes don't always hold up to close scrutiny--her focus was on Harry, not Snape. Also Dumbledore may not know all the facts and is certainly not giving Harry all the details.) But let's just, for the sake of argument, accept your timeline. That way you can look at what I'm really saying without thinking that I'm ignoring a plothole to defend Snape. I'm really not talking about Snape here. I'm talking about JKR's narrative strategy, which affects our perception of a great many characters and events, Snape among them. My concern is with the unreliable narrator. I'm trying to explain that he or she is not Harry but nevertheless generally tells the story from his POV, and that Harry's view of events and characters has all too often proven incorrect. My argument has to do with *narrative technique*, not with conspiracy theory. I am not and have never been a conspiracy theorist. I don't believe in ESE!Lupin or Puppetmaster! Dumbledore or TT!Ron or any other speculation-based theory. I do believe in close reading, in interpretation and analysis of the text, in distrusting what most characters say and withholding judgment of characters based on Harry's perceptions. I'm arguing that we need to distinguish between a character's words and actions and Harry's perception of those words and actions. Pippin's example of Snape giving Lupin the wolfbane potion, which Harry fears is poisoned, is a good example of a perception that later proves erroneous. The presentation of Snape has followed this pattern from the moment of his introduction, when we are set up, along with Harry, to believe that Snape's gaze causes the pain in Harry's scar, but as I'll show later, Snape is not the only character Harry misperceives. The unreliable narrator is not an invention of "Snape apologists" (who are not the same as the "conspiracy theorists," though the categories may overlap). The convention of an omniscient narrator who represents the author's perspective, without limitations or irony, is very rare in twentieth- (and twenty-first) century literature. Most authors choose either a first-person narrator, or, like JKR, a third-person "limited omniscient" narrator who sees through the eyse of one character, or a handful of characters. Our knowledge of events is limited to what that character sees and hears and shaped by what that character knows or thinks he knows. His perception, with very few exceptions, is our perception. JKR's narrator, who (usually) sees through the eyes of a teenage boy who knows less than he thinks he does, should not be confused with the voice of an objective narrator stating the "facts" of the Potterverse. (We see such a narrator very rarely, most notably in the first section of the first chapter of GoF, where we learn about the murder of the Riddles. In the second section of that chapter, we get a new POV character, Frank Bryce, whose perception is in its own way as faulty as Harry's. For example: "Owing, no doubt, to a buildup of earwax, he had heard the word 'Quidditch,' which was not a word at all" (GoF Am. ed. 7). Does anyone who reads the book believe the narrator here? No. We disregard the statement because we understand that it reflects the POV of an old Muggle (and because we recognize "no doubt" as a signal, like "knew" and "realized," that this is the character's POV, not the author's). We should bear in mind that JKR uses exactly the same device when she's presenting Harry's POV; it's just harder to recognize when she's doing so unless we're on the lookout for words that signal perception rather than "fact." This example should demonstrate that not all of the unreliable narration relates to Snape. I used Snape-related examples earlier because they are the most familiar to me and because the post I was responding to was Snape-related. But my concern is not with the plothole you perceive in OoP (which I'm conceding may well exist); it's with the narrative as a whole. I can find many examples that are not Snape-related, beginning with the "car accident" that we're told in SS/PS is the cause of Harry's parents' death. That statement is presented as fact, but it reflects Harry's belief at the time. Once we learn, from Hagrid, that Harry's parents were murdered by Voldemort, we should realize that the narrator is *not* reliable and we should be on our guard. (Contrast LOTR, where we see into many minds and the narrator, IIRC, never leads us astray.) "Unreliable narrator," as I said earlier, is a standard term in literary criticism, a legitimate device common in mystery stories and many other works of fiction, not something that Snapefans have invented to defend a particular character. It can be used in the analysis of any character whose depiction should not be taken at face value. One more example that has nothing to do with Snape should prove this point: ". . . Moody was drinking from his hipflask. Madam Rosmerta. . . was looking askance at Moody as she collected glasses from the tables around them. Perhaps she thought it was an insult to her mulled mead, but Harry knew better. moody had told them all during their last Defense Agaonst the Dark Arts lesson that he preferred to prepare his own food and drink at all times, as it was so easy for Dark wizards to poison an unattended cup" ((GoF Am. ed. 521-22). This passage very cleverly "explains" Crouch!Moody's hipflask from the vantage point of Harry's present "knowledge." But, true as this statement must be for the real Moody (from whom Crouch!Moody must have obtained it), it is wholly false for Crouch!Moody, who is drinking polyjuice potion from the flask. This passage and the others I've cited illustrate the deliberate use by JKR of an unreliable narrator. Other such passages can be found in every book. Most such passages operate as red herrings to mislead us regarding the actions and motivations of a real or suspected villain within a particular book, but the perspective from which Harry views Snape is an ongoing instance of the same tactic used over the long term. Other characters, from Percy Weasley to Fudge, are ambiguously depicted, again because we see them only from Harry's perspective and they have yet to be definitively revealed as good or evil or somewhere in between. There are many instances that I haven't cited and no doubt many that I've overlooked, and still others that will only be recognizable as unreliably narrated when all the evidence is in at the end of Book 7. I am not talking about Flints or scenes that JKR has perhaps not thought through fully (which may or may not be the case for Snape's actions on the night of the MoM). I am talking about the deliberate use of a literary device common in mystery novels and other works of fiction told from something other than an omniscient point of view, the unreliable narrator. Nor am I saying that we can't take *anything* the narrator says as true. Obviously, when the narrator tells us that "[Winky] was clutching a bottle of butterbeer, swaying slightly on her stool" (GoF 536), to take a random example, we are to take this assertion as a statement of fact within the context of the book. But it would be naive to accept the narrator's assertion that there is no such word as "Quidditch" as the same sort of objective information. It merely reflects old Frank's inaccurate perception. We need to be on the lookout for the same type of assertions when they reflect Harry's PoV and determine for ourselves, based on the evidence at hand, whether such perceptions are accurate. A mystery writer must at many points deceive the reader, and the HP series is in some respects one big mystery, not just a series of individual mysteries each resolved within a single volume. One key element in the ongoing mystery that will not be fully resolved until Book 7 is Severus Snape. JKR has told us that there is more to him than meets the eye, that we should look beneath the surface. One way to do that is to strip away the subjective elements in Harry's POV (and our own personal experience of "horrible teachers" projected onto him) and look only at the actual words and actions rather than Harry's interpretation of them. And even that is not enough to fully reveal Snape's character traits and motivation. For that we'll have to wait until Book 7, when I hope she'll answer the questions that Harry asks near th end of GoF (Am. ed. 720-21). And even then, I think, the mysterious Severus Snape, and all the other characters whose thoughts we will never see because of the limited omniscient narration, will remain subject to interpretation. And so, for that matter, will Harry himself. Carol, jumping down from the podium with apologies for the lecture From finwitch at yahoo.com Tue Nov 9 07:24:42 2004 From: finwitch at yahoo.com (finwitch) Date: Tue, 09 Nov 2004 07:24:42 -0000 Subject: Harry's questions ... parents - Dangerous Questions In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117457 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "delwynmarch" wrote: > > Finwitch wrote: > "It has to do with subconcious - and actually, Harry doesn't fear not > so much of punishment but rejection. Dursleys *already* reject him > (and they'd be puninshing him anyway) - so it's not OF Dursleys. When > he has people who care for him, he doesn't dare ask because he fears > he'll lose them/their love." > > Del replies : > Do you have any canon to back that up ? Because I don't see that in Harry. > Del replies : > What do you mean by he doesn't know "enough" ? When Sirius tells him > he knew Harry's grandparents, what doesn't Harry know that would > prevent him from asking "Oh, my grandparents ?! What were they like ?" ? Finwitch: Why would Harry need to ask, being as Sirius is already telling him about them? Asking would only interrupt and prevent getting the information. Harry asks when he finds out something that makes him confused (pensieve scene), when he doesn't understand. Questions, IMO, are in a between area of knowing 'nothing' and knowing 'all'. > Del replies : > Harry was still angry when he got to 12GP. And his temper didn't > improve when the only people he thought of questioning (Ron and > Hermione) couldn't tell him anything. Finwitch: Yes, but if Harry's irrational in many things, he's not wasting his time asking questions of people who can't give him the answers. Petunia DOES know something Harry desperately wants to know - his friends know no more than he does, all they give him is 'adults won't tell us anything'. Twins try to help with their Extendable Ears, but even they don't get much anymore. (and they're of age) And Harry usually trys to figure what sort of answer a person would give him before he asks. (As when it came to the scar. He figured out what Dursleys, Hermione & Ron, Weasley Clan would say. He considered Dumbledore (Who does know the answer) but didn't know how to ask. (hmm.. I think Harry's timidness about asking questions comes most clear with Dumbledore, although he DOES ask - and then Dumbledore though defending him, pays no attention to him). He wrote to Sirius about it. AND his reaction to the answer - 'oh, no, he's risking himself for me - I never should have told him'. Each time Harry asks (except when Dumbledore or someone specifically prompts him to do so) he's either shouted at, not getting any info, or overwhelmed with worry or concern. Oh yes. For Harry, it's ask a question = trouble. Sometimes he's just angry enough & desperate enough to ask a question. Finwitch From kelsey_dangelo at yahoo.com Tue Nov 9 04:54:45 2004 From: kelsey_dangelo at yahoo.com (Kelsey Dangelo) Date: Mon, 8 Nov 2004 20:54:45 -0800 (PST) Subject: Dirty Harry/Clean Harry or Harry's good moral core/compass or Harry's Utilitarian/Kantian moral ethics In-Reply-To: <1099726647.82451.24470.m21@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <20041109045445.95518.qmail@web53101.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 117458 Here's a question that recently struck me, considering this thread that I've been very engaged with. This is maybe a little bit more difficult to answer than whether or not Harry will kill Voldie. Based entirely on our discussion/beliefs on Harry's moral core/moral motivation/moral activities/moral position---In a later book (when he's cooled down and understands the implications), will Harry, given the chance, kill/maim/abuse Bellatrix in revenge for Sirius? [I'm subtracting the possibility that killing Bellatrix would be for a much greater good (i.e. that she's about to hit the red button that will release the four horsemen of the apocalypse). Let's say, hypothetically, that Harry faces a repeat of the Shrieking Shack-Sirius show down, where he has the opportunity to kill Bellatrix (someone he now knows to be guilty and dangerous and bad).] Personally, I (defender of ESG!Harry and HeroFigure!Harry) think Harry would resist temptation (after an internal battle) and subdue Bellatrix to imprisonment rather than murder or abuse her. I don't think that Harry is a member of the older Order of Knights (members who include Wyatt Earp, Sirius Black, Remus Lupin, Achilles, Hamlet, and Inigo Montoya), nor will he scribe to their code of Revenge ("Hello, my name is Harry Potter, you killed my godfather, prepare to die." Not going to happen, IMO). Harry has gone and will go through a lot of pain, suffering, and internal moral battles and debates. But I still think he's got the same moral code that stayed his hand for Sirius and made him stand in front of Peter. Anyone care to agree or disagree with me? Please? Kelsey, who is hopping up and down, hoping for a reply. __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Tue Nov 9 09:00:53 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Tue, 09 Nov 2004 09:00:53 -0000 Subject: Harry's questions about his parents (was Harry, Hermione, Sirius, and the Dr In-Reply-To: <004a01c4c5fb$9bc0bf20$0a2f0dd4@taxi> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117459 Susana Cunha wrote : " Well, if he got into Snape's pensive without knowing how to get out I'll have to agree with you! But, really, he wouldn't! He probably found out after the accident with DD's pensive." Del replies : I personally think he didn't know how to get out of the Pensieve. DD didn't explain to him, and Harry is not the kind to look something up in books unless he badly needs to. Susana wrote : "I know we never see him lingering in technical details like Hermione does, but we are only told the interesting plot (though I'd be terribly interested in technical details - but that's just me). He did seem to know a lot more about DADA than the other students. I can only assume he *does* look things up in books or, at the very least, asks Hermione." Del replies : If I remember well, those spells he first taught the DA were mostly those he learned the year before for the TriWizard Tournament. I found mentions of Expelliarmus (they learned that one back in CoS, at the Duelling club), Impediment Jinx, Reductor Curse, Stunning. And then he got those DADA books at Christmas, and he learned new spells from them in order to teach the DA. And of course, there's the Patronus Charm. Del From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Tue Nov 9 09:18:28 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Tue, 09 Nov 2004 09:18:28 -0000 Subject: Harry's questions ... parents - Dangerous Questions In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117460 Finwitch wrote : " Why would Harry need to ask, being as Sirius is already telling him about them? Asking would only interrupt and prevent getting the information." Del replies : Here's how it went : 'Where did you go?' asked Harry, staring at (Sirius). 'Your dad's place,' said Sirius. 'Your grandparents were really good about it; they sort of adopted me as a second son. Yeah, I camped out at your dad's in the school holidays, and when I was seventeen I got a place of my own. My Uncle Alphard had left me a decent bit of gold - he's been wiped off here, too, that's probably why - anyway, after that I looked after myself. I was always welcome at Mr and Mrs Potter's for Sunday lunch, though.' 'But... why did you...?' 'Leave?' Not only didn't Harry ask about his grandparents, but he steered the conversation away from them to keep it focused on Sirius. I can understand that he wanted to know more about Sirius at the time, but I can't see that what Sirius told him about his grandparents was anywhere near enough. And yet Harry never asked him about them. Finwitch wrote : "Yes, but if Harry's irrational in many things, he's not wasting his time asking questions of people who can't give him the answers. Petunia DOES know something Harry desperately wants to know - his friends know no more than he does, all they give him is 'adults won't tell us anything'. Twins try to help with their Extendable Ears, but even they don't get much anymore. (and they're of age)" Del replies : Petunia, Ron and Hermione, the Twins. What about Sirius, who made it so clear that he was willing and ready to answer his questions, who actually *encouraged* him to ask them ? Finwitch wrote : " He wrote to Sirius about it. AND his reaction to the answer - 'oh, no, he's risking himself for me - I never should have told him'." Del replies : Now, that makes a bit more sense. However, I still don't see what would have been risky with asking Sirius questions *privately*. There's no way it could have put Sirius in any more danger than he already was. As for Molly, DD and the rest of the Order, they didn't need to know, they didn't need to be there. Del From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Tue Nov 9 09:53:53 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Tue, 09 Nov 2004 09:53:53 -0000 Subject: Dursleys abuse In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117461 Alla wrote : "Your Honor. Ladies and Gentlemen of the Jury. It is the prosecution position that Petunia and Vernon Dursleys should be found guilty of abuse and /or neglect of their nephew Harry Potter. (snip) P.S. Strangely enough, I tried to think about any possible defense of Dursleys and ... well, I failed. It is very easy for me to imagine the defense of Snape. For Dursleys, well, I see none. One can say that Dursleys did not ask for Harry to be brought to live with them. True, they did not. But to me, the sister does have some kind of obligation to take care of her orphan nephew if necessary, so this defense does not sit well with me, either." Del replies : I'm not saying that the Dursleys aren't guilty, because they are IMO. But I do think that the point you brought in their defense matters. Yes the sister has an obligation, moral and maybe even legal, to take care of her orphan nephew. But take care she did ! Harry did not die of starvation. He apparently did not suffer from any nutritional deficiency either, though his scrawny appearance might indeed have been due to the fact that he didn't eat enough for his needs. He went to school. He wasn't left naked. He wasn't physically tortured. The Dursleys did beat him up (but never anywhere near to death), but they seem to consider this as acceptable in all cases where discipline is required. They never see that Dudley needs to be disciplined by them, but we don't hear them complaining because someone else disciplined him either. He was used as a servant, but not continually. When Harry had to spend the whole day working like a dog in the sun in CoS, it was made very clear that this was exceptional. All in all, the Dursleys did take care of Harry. They did a pretty bad job of it, granted, but it was still a good enough job that Harry managed to live at Hogwarts. Petunia obviously had deep emotional issues regarding her sister from a quite young age. The enmity and jealousy she felt towards her were enormous. The efforts she made to cut herself off, both physically and emotionally, from Lily were amazing. She built a life for herself, a life as close to pefection as she could imagine, with a powerful husband and an adored son, in a neat little house in a respectable neighbourhood. She had finally obtained total control over her own life, and she had discarded everything that had made her teenage years miserable : the facts that her sister was a freak, and that their parents favoured Lily because of it (at least in Petunia's eyes). She might have come to a better understanding of the situation and to some kind of healing, if she had been given enough time, but things didn't turn out that way. Petunia was still pretty young and she had barely had time to settle into her perfect life when Harry was dropped on her doorstep. I have no problem understanding that she blew up a casket, especially since she was also left alone to deal with the situation (a DD specialty apparently). She received no support, she received no incentive to behave, she was left to deal with the situation as she could. But she *couldn't* deal with it, as DD knew very well, so she got everything all wrong. I don't approve of what she and Vernon did, but I can't completely blame them either. They are only human, and what was asked of them was inhuman in my idea, especially without giving them help or at least keeping a watchful eye on them. Del From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Tue Nov 9 09:59:03 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Tue, 09 Nov 2004 09:59:03 -0000 Subject: Timing of the prophecy In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117462 khinterberg wrote : "Sorry Eustace, I concede my point. I do understand now. Thank you for the help!" Del replies : A last piece of info if you want it : in his after-disaster speech, DD says : 'Sybill's prophecy could have applied to two wizard boys, both born at the end of July that year' Del From finwitch at yahoo.com Tue Nov 9 11:42:29 2004 From: finwitch at yahoo.com (finwitch) Date: Tue, 09 Nov 2004 11:42:29 -0000 Subject: Quills In-Reply-To: <002c01c4c369$a78f8640$704b6d51@f3b7j4> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117463 > Steve wrote: > >So, back to Hogwarts, I can't imagine modern muggle kids putting up > >with the tedious struggle of writing with quills; messy, slow, and > >tedious. Personally I would have smuggled in a pen, and if the > >teachers objected, perhaps they like the nice calligraphic writing > >style of quills, I would have switched to a nice calligraphy tipped > >fountain pen. Ffred replied: > That's if WW quills work in the same way as Muggle ones, of course. > > There may well be magic that keeps them sharp (Umbridge-style...) or ensures > that they hold more ink than your standard bit of feather otherwise would. > > There may be exam regulations (the educational establishment being notorious > for that kind of thing) which require the paper to be written with a quill. > > And it may even be that there is some magical work (Ancient Runes for > example) that just wouldn't work if it was inscribed with a biro. Finwitch: I have something to say: Quills are environment-friendly! After all, the quill is a feather of a bird and therefore not in anyway consuming environment Nor does producing a quill require pollution or mining (plastic or metal). After ink is used: Our pens either must be thrown away once the ink is used, or change the ink-container (tricky business) and throw away the old one. And become rubbish - and part of the ink is wasted! With Quills, you just refill your ink-bottle. (which might be magically refilling itself). Also, Wizards have special inks - Invisible, Colour-changing, green... And of course, wizard CAN use copy+paste (I recall Fred/George saying to use this option when writing lines for Binns in detention), possibly cut+paste as well. Oh, and Quills don't roll over like pens do... In addition, it's not just the Quill, but *parchment* they're writing on. No need to cut down trees for paper, then... Magical benefits: I'd imagine that ink-filled ball-pointed pen is more difficult to charm flying than a feather of a bird. Quills can be specially charmed: Quick Quotes Quill, Anti-cheating Charmed Quills for exams, the horrible Blood Quill... It's entirely possible that QQQ enables you to put your thoughts into words, properly spelled with correct grammar - even if you don't know how to write yourself. Now THAT would be one handy tool for an illiterate wizard, would it not? (My guess: Aberforth has one, and Albus can tell that he uses it when he's sending letters). What comes to Ancient Runes, well, whether they're like Nordic (or Viking) Runes or something like Chinese/Japanese, I think they are indeed easier to form with a Quill than with a pen. Finwitch From finwitch at yahoo.com Tue Nov 9 12:26:24 2004 From: finwitch at yahoo.com (finwitch) Date: Tue, 09 Nov 2004 12:26:24 -0000 Subject: Harry's questions ... parents - Dangerous Questions In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117464 Del: > Not only didn't Harry ask about his grandparents, but he steered the > conversation away from them to keep it focused on Sirius. I can > understand that he wanted to know more about Sirius at the time, but I > can't see that what Sirius told him about his grandparents was > anywhere near enough. And yet Harry never asked him about them. Finwitch: Ask what about them? They were NICE (enough so to sort of adopt Sirius) and they are dead now. That Sirius left them once he was of age prompted a question - (because of a possible fight, either with Harry's father or his grandparents) - there wasn't one. Sirius just didn't want to live on *charity* when he could live on his own. As curious as a reader may be, I don't see Harry needing any more information than that. They're dead. > Del: > Petunia, Ron and Hermione, the Twins. What about Sirius, who made it > so clear that he was willing and ready to answer his questions, who > actually *encouraged* him to ask them ? Sirius wasn't there when Harry was getting out his frustration of not knowing. (and, he doesn't even know Sirius is at 12 GP yet). When he finally sees Sirius, R&H had already told him that no knowing adult (including Sirius) is telling anything. So again, no point asking if they're not telling. Of course, then came the arguement between Sirius & Molly about whether Harry, Fred, George, Ron, Ginny and Hermione get to know... Harry gets to know because his godfather says so, Ron puts in 'Harry will tell us anyway' - so Ron & Hermione get to know, Fred pulls the 'of age'-card for him and George - poor Ginny is the onlyone sent to bed. (so Molly can assert her authority on *someone* about this...) And of course, Harry may have figured that any further information is secret and as much as he'd WANT to know, well, it might be better if he didn't. Need-to-know basis to avoid crucial information leak. > Del replies : > Now, that makes a bit more sense. However, I still don't see what > would have been risky with asking Sirius questions *privately*. > There's no way it could have put Sirius in any more danger than he > already was. As for Molly, DD and the rest of the Order, they didn't > need to know, they didn't need to be there. Finwitch: Well, maybe he did - maybe he just enjoyed Sirius' company, maybe complained about being stressed about the upcoming trial/Dumbledore avoiding him... Anyway, asking questions isn't Harry's style of learning. He's more of an observing type. (As am I for that matter). And of all Gryff. boys, only Seamus seems to be the sort who loves to ask questions. (and of course, when Harry's his target/source, Harry just finds it annoying). Finwitch From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com Tue Nov 9 11:25:00 2004 From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (Barry Arrowsmith) Date: Tue, 9 Nov 2004 11:25:00 +0000 Subject: Dursleys abuse. Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117465 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "delwynmarch" wrote: > > Alla wrote : "Your Honor. Ladies and Gentlemen of the Jury. It is the prosecution position that Petunia and Vernon Dursleys should be found guilty of abuse and /or neglect of their nephew Harry Potter. P.S. Strangely enough, I tried to think about any possible defense of Dursleys and ... well, I failed. > > Del replies : I'm not saying that the Dursleys aren't guilty, because they are IMO. But I do think that the point you brought in their defense matters. Yes the sister has an obligation, moral and maybe even legal, to take care of her orphan nephew. But take care she did ! > The case for the defense (or at least mitigation) was made back in March (does no-one read back posts anymore?). Try: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/92428 plus follow-ups 92459, 924576 for the Dursley viewpoint. Dumping Harry on them was just another form of Muggle torture - this time not by DEs but by DD. Kneasy From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Tue Nov 9 13:16:43 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Tue, 09 Nov 2004 13:16:43 -0000 Subject: Every Tom, Dick and Harry... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117466 Antosha: > A very random and possibly pointless thought occurred to me today. > > Could there be any significance in the fact that the two > antagonists in this series both have what would normally be > considered nicknames? > We know that Tom Riddle is really a Tom, not a Thomas or Tomas > because of his ridiculous little anagram. > Harry, while somewhat more common as a given name, is also > typically a nickname for Harold or Henry. > > Any significance? > Am I just lacking sleep? SSSusan: Interesting! And it's not just that they're common nicknames, but that they come from that "Tom, Dick and Harry" grouping. Any ideas on who's going to turn out to be Dick, then? :-) Siriusly Snapey Susan From finwitch at yahoo.com Tue Nov 9 13:35:24 2004 From: finwitch at yahoo.com (finwitch) Date: Tue, 09 Nov 2004 13:35:24 -0000 Subject: Every Tom, Dick and Harry... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117467 > > SSSusan: > Interesting! And it's not just that they're common nicknames, but > that they come from that "Tom, Dick and Harry" grouping. Any ideas > on who's going to turn out to be Dick, then? :-) Finwitch: Dick's the Half Blood Prince, I guess... now we just need to find out his surname. One with a meaning since we have Riddle (in a way, the prophecy is a riddle too!) and Potter (common enough, a profession for making pottery out of clay). So are we going to have Dick Blue, Dick Noble, Dick King - or maybe even Dick Prince? (Would make him Prince by name! and everyone's calling him by surname...) Finwitch From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Tue Nov 9 13:51:46 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Tue, 09 Nov 2004 13:51:46 -0000 Subject: Harry's questions ... parents - Dangerous Questions In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117468 Finwitch wrote : "Ask what about them? They were NICE (enough so to sort of adopt Sirius) and they are dead now. That Sirius left them once he was of age prompted a question - (because of a possible fight, either with Harry's father or his grandparents) - there wasn't one. Sirius just didn't want to live on *charity* when he could live on his own. As curious as a reader may be, I don't see Harry needing any more information than that. They're dead." Del replies : 1. Does Harry even *know* that they are dead ? We the readers suspect that because the Dursleys are Harry's only relatives, but does Harry actually know that his grandparents are dead ? 2. Even if they are dead, there are TONS of things he could want to know about them : what were they called, where did they live, did they have any brothers and sisters, what were they like (and "nice" isn't even the beginning of an answer to this one), how did they die, and so on. Finwitch wrote : "Sirius wasn't there when Harry was getting out his frustration of not knowing. (and, he doesn't even know Sirius is at 12 GP yet). When he finally sees Sirius, R&H had already told him that no knowing adult (including Sirius) is telling anything. So again, no point asking if they're not telling. Of course, then came the arguement between Sirius & Molly about whether Harry, Fred, George, Ron, Ginny and Hermione get to know... " Del replies : An argument in which Sirius made it clear that he *wanted* to answer *Harry*'s questions. Finwitch wrote : "And of course, Harry may have figured that any further information is secret and as much as he'd WANT to know, well, it might be better if he didn't. Need-to-know basis to avoid crucial information leak." Del replies : Personal information about Harry himself and his family isn't classified information. Finwitch wrote : " Anyway, asking questions isn't Harry's style of learning. He's more of an observing type. (As am I for that matter)." Del replies : He's of the passive type : he just waits until someone tells him something. Del From elsyee_h at yahoo.com Tue Nov 9 14:09:28 2004 From: elsyee_h at yahoo.com (Tammy) Date: Tue, 09 Nov 2004 14:09:28 -0000 Subject: Dursleys abuse In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117469 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "delwynmarch" wrote: > > Alla wrote : > "Your Honor. Ladies and Gentlemen of the Jury. It is the prosecution > position that Petunia and Vernon Dursleys should be found guilty of > abuse and /or neglect of their nephew Harry Potter. > > (snip) > > P.S. Strangely enough, I tried to think about any possible defense of > Dursleys and ... well, I failed. > > Del replied : > I'm not saying that the Dursleys aren't guilty, because they are IMO. > > But I do think that the point you brought in their defense matters. > > Yes the sister has an obligation, moral and maybe even legal, to take > care of her orphan nephew. But take care she did ! > Tammy replies: IMO the Dursleys are guilty of neglect and emotional abuse, however there just isn't enough evidence to support the claim of physical abuse. As for Dudley beating on Harry, it seems to be a standard thing among brothers (Harry and Dudley, having lived together nearly all of their lives, have the same type of relationship) that one bullies the other. True some families manage to avoid it, but boys will be boys. And to give the Dursleys more credit: It's not just that she had a legal and moral obligation to take care of her nephew and she did it, it's the fact that she knew what happened to her sister (obviously from her reaction in OotP), knew what went after her, and still took Harry in. I think we'll find out in Book 6 or 7 that Petunia even knew that Voldemort wasn't fully gone yet, that by taking in Harry she would be endangering her own family. -Tammy From quigonginger at yahoo.com Tue Nov 9 14:16:30 2004 From: quigonginger at yahoo.com (quigonginger) Date: Tue, 09 Nov 2004 14:16:30 -0000 Subject: Every Tom, Dick and Harry... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117470 Finwitch wrote: > Dick's the Half Blood Prince, I guess... now we just need to find out > his surname. One with a meaning since we have Riddle (in a way, the > prophecy is a riddle too!) and Potter (common enough, a profession > for making pottery out of clay). > > So are we going to have Dick Blue, Dick Noble, Dick King - or maybe > even Dick Prince? (Would make him Prince by name! and everyone's > calling him by surname...) Ginger: Now there's a new one. Could the Prince family be an old wizarding family (perhaps DE's?) who had a wayward son who met a Muggle? Or could they be an old Muggle family, one of whom chanced to fall in love with a witch? Now is "Dick" Prince a new student, or a student who Harry hasn't noticed yet? (gasp! the good Slytherin) or an adult? So many questions. I kind of like this. It's a different take than trying to infuse royalty into the picture. Too bad all the RL royal males are too old for Hogwarts. Ginger, wondering if our own Catlady is really a full Muggle ;o) From quigonginger at yahoo.com Tue Nov 9 14:32:44 2004 From: quigonginger at yahoo.com (quigonginger) Date: Tue, 09 Nov 2004 14:32:44 -0000 Subject: When were the Longbottoms attacked? (was Re: Did the Potters know the prophecy?) In-Reply-To: <20041108163026.72933.qmail@web53110.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117471 > Juli: Barty Jr was caught with DEs that managed to stay > out of Azkaban, this doesn't mean he wasn't involved > in the Longbottoms' torture. Bella & Co were torturing > Frank and Alice in order to get some idea where LV > was. Ginger here: I hadn't meant to imply that Barty hadn't participated in the Longbottom torture. I just meant to say that he had been caught with them. I certainly believe he's guilty as can be. Ginger earlier: > > Sirius was in Azkaban within a couple days of LV's > > demise. Since Bella was his cousin, he'd have taken > > special notice of her arrival compared to the arrivals > > of strangers or near strangers. I would think that > > talking one's way out of Azkaban would take a bit of > > time. > > Yes, but we don't know how long was it between LV > going vapor and Bella going to Azkaban, it may have > been months, since we know it happened long after LV > was gone and everyone felt safe. Ginger now: Yes, that was the point I was trying to make. I was refuting Eustace Scrubb's theory that there was very little time between the two. I think there was a bit more than he thinks, although the text is vague. > Juli: During the entire VWI Crouch was favourite for > new MoM, he was a declared enemy of the dark side, he > fought fire with fire, but then after LV was gone and > Crouch Jr was found hanging out with DE, then his > popularity went down. He became a third or fourth for > the MoM, we know DD was the first choice, Fudge was > the second in line, DD didn't want the job so Fudge > got it, and Crouch? Off he goes to the Department of > Int'l Cooperation all because his son's a DE. Ginger again: Very good point! I had completely forgotten that Dumbledore was the one everyone wanted. So that helps with the problem that I had with the timeline as added to in OoP. Thanks! > Juli again: I don't think Barty Jr was with the > Lestranges when he was caught, he could have been with > any other DE but he was convicted with the Lestranges. Ginger: I had assumed that he had been caught with the Lestranges. It read that way to me at the trial. On page 603 (GoF, US paperback) Harry asks Dumbledore if Barty was involved, to which DD replies that he doesn't know. Interestingly, Barty doesn't confess to it under Veritaserum. But then, DD never asked. In all, I think that there was more than just a little time between LV vapourizing and the Longbottoms' torture. I also believe Barty was guilty based on what little evidence we have. I hope all this came out clearly. I tried to snip as much as I could and have it come out somewhat sensibly. Ginger, headed to bed. From foxmoth at qnet.com Tue Nov 9 14:56:08 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Tue, 09 Nov 2004 14:56:08 -0000 Subject: Dursleys abuse In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117472 Alla: > P.S. Strangely enough, I tried to think about any possible defense > of Dursleys and ... well, I failed. > > It is very easy for me to imagine the defense of Snape. For > Dursleys, well, I see none. One can say that Dursleys did not ask for Harry to be brought to live with them. True, they did not. But to me, the sister does have some kind of obligation to take care of her orphan nephew if necessary, so this defense does not sit well with me, either.< > Pippin: She doesn't, you know. She could have sent him along to the orphanage, or put him in foster care. She wasn't Harry's godmother and she hadn't accepted responsibility for Harry before he got dumped on her. Once she accepted the responsibility, she could have done better by Harry -- but then again, her idea of "better" is the way she treats Dudley, which is why I think Dumbledore was wiser to leave her alone than to force her to be "nice" to Harry. And while I can't say much in Petunia's defense, I could certainly understand if the British equivalent of child protective services had more pressing cases on its hands. I would hate to think of it devoting its resources to investigating the Dursleys while other children were being *routinely* beaten, starved, kept home from school because they had no glasses or shoes, etc. There's also the fact that a wizard child as powerful as Harry was as out of place in a Muggle household as Grawp was in the forest, where he had to be chained up for his own protection. We've heard about a few upsetting incidents, but we also know, from the occlumency lessons, that Harry has forgotten quite a bit about his childhood, including, apparently, an incident with a dragon. I'm sure if the Dursleys had any idea that it was good for Harry to sleep in that cupboard they'd've removed him forthwith, but a windowless bedroom isn't a bad idea if you are worried about wizards who need eye contact in order to curse you, especially if even a curse that bounces off is likely to cause a good deal of damage to those around you. Pippin From dk59us at yahoo.com Tue Nov 9 14:56:19 2004 From: dk59us at yahoo.com (Eustace_Scrubb) Date: Tue, 09 Nov 2004 14:56:19 -0000 Subject: Hire Dates (was Re: Timing of the prophecy) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117473 Eustace_Scrubb: > > > Dumbledore isn't precise about the timing, but it was > > > cold and wet, so let's say early spring/late winter, 16 > > > years ago. That might make it 4 or 5 months prior to Neville's > > > and Harry's births. khinterberg now: > > That very day [Sept.8], Umbridge inspects Professor Trelawney, > > and Trelawney reluctantly reveals that she has been employed in > > that post for "nearly sixteen years." Hickengruendler: > > I don't think we should take Trelawney's statement to literally. > She said she worked in Hogwarts for nearly sixteen years in the > scene you mentioned, and then again she said that she's in Hogwarts > for sixteen years, in the scene where she's sacked. All that it > means is IMO that she was hired between October 1979th and April or > May 1980. Not a very specific date, but I don't think we can come > any closer in our guesses. > > It's the same about Snape. He said in September/October that he > worked in Hogwarts for fourteen years. If we took it literally, he > was hired before Voldie's downfall. But it's way more likely that > he was speaking losely and was hired in November, after Harry > defeated Voldemort. That would still count as 14 years, even if not > exactly. Eustace_Scrubb again: The dates of hire _are_ another source of confusion. I do think the other evidence cited leads to the conclusion that both Snape and Trelawney were hired mid-term. The only similar situations I can recall during Harry's time at Hogwarts are: 1) Professor Grubbly-Plank serving both as a short-term and long-term substitute for Hagrid (wonder what she's up to when not substituting?); and 2) Firenze filling in when Trelawney's sacked. I can see that Dumbledore probably wanted both Snape and Trelawney safely installed at Hogwarts ASAP due to their roles in the war against Voldemort. But one wonders...who taught those subjects immediately prior? Did they die or retire mid-term? Did either Snape or Trelawney come in a long-term substitutes? Apparently there _was_ an opening in Divination, as the prophecy was given during Sibyll's job interview. Details, details! Cheers, Eustace_Scrubb "Not useless," said the Owl. "Eustace!" From templar1112002 at yahoo.com Tue Nov 9 15:07:45 2004 From: templar1112002 at yahoo.com (templar1112002) Date: Tue, 09 Nov 2004 15:07:45 -0000 Subject: Harry's questions about his parents (was Harry, Hermione, Sirius, and the Dream, 2-way mirror) In-Reply-To: <004a01c4c5fb$9bc0bf20$0a2f0dd4@taxi> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117474 > Juli wrote: > > > During Christmas at GP Harry > > wanted to tell Sirius not to worry that it was OK > > getting oclumency lessons with Snape, but he didn't he > > found plenty of time to talk to Ron and Hermione, but > > not 5 minutes to talk to his godfather. It just bugs > > me, why didn't they talked? If I was Harry I would > > have gotten as much information as possible about my > > parents and my grand-parents, but he didn't. I don't > > think he even knows his grand-parents name. He's never > > asked anyone were his money came from. Nothing, he > > doesn't seem to want to know anything at all. > > Magda wrote: > >>I was particularly annoyed when Snape comes to tell Harry about > occlumency lessons and Molly finds him - where? getting the lowdown > on his grandparents from Sirius? talking to Remus about what is was > like at school with James? No, he's playing chess with Ron. Like he > never seens Ron for 10 months of the flipping year anyway. > > And when this dormant curiosity of his does have its annual flare up, > is he at 12GP where he can exercise it with Sirius? Or in the > library so he can look up references to his own history (like > Hermione did before she got on the Hogwarts Express in PS/SS)? No, > he's in Snape's office and sticks his head into a pensieve - which he > still doesn't know how to get out of.<< > > --------------------------- > Susana wrote: > > Yes, it seems strange at first sight. But you need to remember where he's > coming from. The kind of reaction he would probably provoke on his uncle and > aunt with questions about his parents would leave a mark in a young child. > He grew up learning that it was *wrong* to talk about his roots. > > I'm more concern about what Juli wrote: he didn't talk to Sirius at all! Not > about his parents, nor anything! Maybe he was jus being a teenager (thinking > he had all the time in the world; not wanting to have a serious talk) but it > bugs me a lot more than his lack of curiosity, correction, his lack of will > to talk about his parents (he does seem curious, but he doesn't ask). I'd ex > pect him to run around Sirius like a puppy whenever he had the chance. > > > ----------------------------- > Magda wrote: > >>My annoyance with Harry over the whole curiosity issue has grown so > much that it interferes with my willingness to see him as an > attractive character. I'm starting to think he's just dumb in a lot > of ways.<< > ---------------------------- ********My two cents: Back when you were 15,16,17 years old --How many of you out there knew how your grandparents met? Or at least some of the 'censored' details of your parents dating life? Moreover, did you ask for that information or did you just happen to hear about it because it was 'given' to you, as a story or comment? I found Harry's "un-curiousness" rather puzzling in the beginning, too. But going back in time with myself, I don't recall being that curious about my ancestors as I became when I started having my own family, that's when it hit me: my ancestors must have gone through all this stuff too, and I don't even know how or when it happened, I didn't even know some of my great-aunts/uncles' names. Oh well, maybe it is just me, but in all honesty, I don't think that Harry is *that* different from any other teen boy, especially if you add his Pavlov's conditioning to not ask questions about his parents/family. Marcela From antoshachekhonte at yahoo.com Tue Nov 9 15:39:02 2004 From: antoshachekhonte at yahoo.com (antoshachekhonte) Date: Tue, 09 Nov 2004 15:39:02 -0000 Subject: Every Tom, Dick and Harry... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117475 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "quigonginger" wrote: > > Finwitch wrote: > > Dick's the Half Blood Prince, I guess... now we just need to find > out > > his surname. One with a meaning since we have Riddle (in a way, the > > prophecy is a riddle too!) and Potter (common enough, a profession > > for making pottery out of clay). > > > > So are we going to have Dick Blue, Dick Noble, Dick King - or maybe > > even Dick Prince? (Would make him Prince by name! and everyone's > > calling him by surname...) > > Ginger: > > Now there's a new one. Could the Prince family be an old wizarding > family (perhaps DE's?) who had a wayward son who met a Muggle? Or > could they be an old Muggle family, one of whom chanced to fall in > love with a witch? > > Now is "Dick" Prince a new student, or a student who Harry hasn't > noticed yet? (gasp! the good Slytherin) or an adult? > > So many questions. I kind of like this. It's a different take than > trying to infuse royalty into the picture. Too bad all the RL royal > males are too old for Hogwarts. > > Ginger, wondering if our own Catlady is really a full Muggle ;o) From nkafkafi at yahoo.com Tue Nov 9 15:43:10 2004 From: nkafkafi at yahoo.com (nkafkafi) Date: Tue, 09 Nov 2004 15:43:10 -0000 Subject: Timing of the prophecy In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117476 > Del replies : > A last piece of info if you want it : in his after-disaster speech, DD > says : > > 'Sybill's prophecy could have applied to two wizard boys, both born at > the end of July that year' > Neri: Good catch, Del. This "that year" indeed seems to imply that the prophecy was given in 1980. But I'm still not convinced. Trelawney's "nearly sixteen years" (said in September 1985) seems more specific in time than DD's "cold wet night sixteen years ago" (said in June 1986). The "cold and wet" also implies winter or autumn. So my question is: when DD says "that year", could he mean the school year, not the calendar year? In this case it could also mean October or November 1979. DD is likely to think in terms of school years since he was a headmaster all that time. Moreover, JKR is likely to think in terms of school years, since her books follow them. Neri From Gregory.Lynn at gmail.com Tue Nov 9 16:53:15 2004 From: Gregory.Lynn at gmail.com (Gregory Lynn) Date: Tue, 9 Nov 2004 11:53:15 -0500 Subject: Neville as Provider of Information Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117477 If I recall correctly there is a theory that Neville experienced something during the night his parents were Crucio'ed and that his memory has suffered as a result. There are at least a couple instances of Neville either providing information or having information that Harry would wish he had. I am thinking of the bit about Nicholas Flamel in Sorcerer's Stone and the Gillyweed in Goblet of Fire. It's Neville that gives Harry the Dumbledore card that mentions Flamel and it's Neville who has the water plants book. Are there any other instances that I am not recalling? Might that be Neville's role in the grand finale, to provide information to Harry that he will need during the confrontation with Lord Thingy? -- Gregory Lynn From foxmoth at qnet.com Tue Nov 9 17:08:02 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Tue, 09 Nov 2004 17:08:02 -0000 Subject: Unreliable narrator (Was: Snape's stalling) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117478 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" wrote: > > My concern is with the unreliable narrator. I'm trying to explain that he or she is not Harry but nevertheless generally tells the story from his POV, and that Harry's view of events and characters has all too often proven incorrect. My argument has to do with *narrative technique*, not with conspiracy theory. I am not and have never been a conspiracy theorist. I don't believe in ESE!Lupin or Puppetmaster! Dumbledore or TT!Ron or any other speculation-based theory. I do believe in close reading, in interpretation and analysis of the text, in distrusting what most characters say and withholding judgment of characters based on Harry's perceptions. I'm arguing that we need to distinguish between a character's words and actions and Harry's perception of those words and actions.< Pippin: Perhaps we should also distinguish between the character's words and actions, and the reader's perception of those words and actions. It seems to me that what I shall call Fanon!Lupin is as much the product of reader speculation, conjecture and outright disregard of canon as that admittedly noncanonical beast Fanon!Draco. By Fanon!Lupin, I mean the adorable werewolf cub, who *didn't lead his friends to become animagi *would never work against someone who helped him *suffered the loss of his closest friends in a single day *thought Sirius must be innocent all along *simply forgot that it was the night of the full moon *was surprised when Snape appeared from under the Invisibility cloak despite having run right past it earlier *has no anger against the current regime Whereas canon Lupin: all refs US hardcover -was a "fully grown werewolf" when transformed - PoA 357 ch 18 - "led three fellow students into becoming Animagi illegally" -PoA 355 ch 18 -"betrayed [Dumbledore's] trust while I was at school" -PoA 356 ch 18 and says, "I haven't changed." ibid -was apparently so distrusted by Sirius *and James* that rather than confronting him with their suspicions that he was a spy, they set a trap for him. "Remus!" Pettigrew squeaked..."You don't believe this...wouldn't Sirius have told you if *they'd* changed the plan" (emphasis mine) -PoA 373 ch 19 -"thought Sirius killed Peter" p351 ch 18 -"convinced [himself] that Sirius was getting into the school using dark arts he learned from Voldemort" p 356 ch 18 - never tells us why he didn't realize he was going to transform - expresses no surprise at the sudden appearance of Snape in the Shrieking Shack -has spoken against Umbridge "I know she's a nasty piece of work though -- you should hear Remus talk about her." OOP 302 ch 14 Apropos of that last point, can anyone find some canon where Lupin says anything critical of Voldemort? Calls him the most evil wizard who ever existed, or says he's the foulest thing that infests the earth, or something like that? I realize it's very unconventional to make a sympathetic character the villain, especially in what some of us think of as a children's book. In that sense, considering Lupin as a potential villain requires a subversive reading. But JKR has said all along that her bad guys are not conventional black hats. Pippin From mommystery at hotmail.com Tue Nov 9 18:18:06 2004 From: mommystery at hotmail.com (mommystery2003) Date: Tue, 09 Nov 2004 18:18:06 -0000 Subject: Why has DD never suggested Snape thank Harry? (Was: Why has DD never suggested H In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117479 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "dumbledore11214" wrote: > > Eggplant: > > > I believe this entire thread is misnamed so I changed it. At the > > time in question Harry had just saved the entire Wizarding world > > (including Snape) from a terrible fate; in fact although he had > not > > yet reached his 13'Th birthday this was the second time he had > done > > so. In spite of this Snape continues to treat Harry like dirt; > > thanking Snape under those circumstances would be condescending > and > > grotesque. > > I have to disagree here. It was proven in the first book that Snape is looking after Harry. But does Harry, when everything is over and knowing that Snape was not the total evil "git" he had been made out to be, thank him for looking out for him? No, he conveniently glosses over that and continues his hatred of Snape (which I will fully admit is justified in the treatment he receives from Snape). It wouldn't have cost him much to go up to the man and thank him. But he doesn't. So why should Snape go up to Harry and thank him? His perception of Harry hasn't changed as he sees a boy who disregards the rules and gets away with it because of who he is. I do think Dumbledore should have prodded Harry to thank Snape, but I think he was hoping Harry would do it on his own. But the Harry I have seen throughout these books is somewhat selfish and does think himself above the rules. He justifies his ends forgetting the fact that most times he started the whole ball rolling downhill in the first place. I do not think that for Harry to have thanked Snape would be grotesque or condescending in any way, shape or form. It's called good manners and regardless of the fact whether Snape has good manners or not (and I do think he has some), Harry could have thanked him. Ces From mommystery at hotmail.com Tue Nov 9 18:18:45 2004 From: mommystery at hotmail.com (mommystery2003) Date: Tue, 09 Nov 2004 18:18:45 -0000 Subject: Why has DD never suggested Snape thank Harry? (Was: Why has DD never suggested H In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117480 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "dumbledore11214" wrote: > > Eggplant: > > > I believe this entire thread is misnamed so I changed it. At the > > time in question Harry had just saved the entire Wizarding world > > (including Snape) from a terrible fate; in fact although he had > not > > yet reached his 13'Th birthday this was the second time he had > done > > so. In spite of this Snape continues to treat Harry like dirt; > > thanking Snape under those circumstances would be condescending > and > > grotesque. > > I have to disagree here. It was proven in the first book that Snape is looking after Harry. But does Harry, when everything is over and knowing that Snape was not the total evil "git" he had been made out to be, thank him for looking out for him? No, he conveniently glosses over that and continues his hatred of Snape (which I will fully admit is justified in the treatment he receives from Snape). It wouldn't have cost him much to go up to the man and thank him. But he doesn't. So why should Snape go up to Harry and thank him? His perception of Harry hasn't changed as he sees a boy who disregards the rules and gets away with it because of who he is. I do think Dumbledore should have prodded Harry to thank Snape, but I think he was hoping Harry would do it on his own. But the Harry I have seen throughout these books is somewhat selfish and does think himself above the rules. He justifies his ends forgetting the fact that most times he started the whole ball rolling downhill in the first place. I do not think that for Harry to have thanked Snape would be grotesque or condescending in any way, shape or form. It's called good manners and regardless of the fact whether Snape has good manners or not (and I do think he has some), Harry could have thanked him. Ces From ginnysthe1 at yahoo.com Tue Nov 9 18:26:05 2004 From: ginnysthe1 at yahoo.com (ginnysthe1) Date: Tue, 09 Nov 2004 18:26:05 -0000 Subject: Department of Mysteries Locked Room (includes all previous posts) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117481 Glavgirl first wrote: Wanted to get your thoughts on the locked room in Department of Mysteries. When Harry is trying to find the right door to enter, he goes to the locked door and tries everything to open it. It was odd that it melted the knife that Sirius had given him. In the end of the book, Dumbledore told Harry that there was a locked room in the Department of Mysteries that holds that power that Harry possess. We know it was his heart that kept Voldemort from possessing him for any amount of time. Any ideas on what "power" is behind the locked door? It would be hard to lock up feelings in a room. Especially something that would melt a knife. Nepenthales replied: The door has always left me perplexed. Many people (myself included) have surmised from Dumbledore's speech at the end of the book that the "power" in that room is love, or compassion, or some other similar thing. This makes some sense, but it seems incomplete or somehow only partially realized to me. The question that comes to my mind when I read the passages about the door isn't about what is beyond it. I'm more interested in knowing *why is the door locked*. There is apparently some significant interest in keeping the contents of this room under lock and key, but why? What in this room is more dangerous or important than the veil in the Death Chamber, the time-turners, and the prophecies? Then Juli: My 2 knuts: Maybe this power, whatever it is doesn't have a form, a shape, a physical form, just like air or something, so in order to study it, it must be kept locked in a room, place or container, otherwise it would get lost. I don't think the reason it's locked is because it's more dangerous or important than the other rooms. It is dangerous and important in its own way. Then Snow: Could it be that the door is locked out of protection? Is this symbolized by the way Harry (the one who has so much of the power within this room) is locked away from the wizarding world in a closet under the stairs in a muggle home protected by his mother's sacrifice and compounded with Dumbledore's added protection? Then Finwitch: You know - what if it isn't a door but just a wall pretending? That would explain why Harry couldn't open it with Sirius' knife (which is supposed to open any lock). What ever there is... Maybe something like the fire Akhilleus' mother used to protect her son (she held him by heel, so heel was left vulnerable...) Hmm - AD told Harry his mother's sacrifice lingered in his very skin - perhaps, unlike what Voldemort thinks, it never WAS in Harry's blood... Now Kim: As usual with this list, another great (and new?) thread! Firstly, one thing I noticed rereading the passage in GoF where Harry first received the knife from Sirius as a Christmas present is that it said the knife could open any lock, but when Harry tried to use it on that locked door, he didn't put it in the keyhole, but ran it around the edge of the door and it melted as a result. I wonder if that was the way JKR meant to write that. What if Harry had tried the knife in the keyhole, would it have worked then? Of course maybe the knife wasn't made to fit a keyhole either (so there goes that theory!) As to what's behind the door of the locked room (and I hope my take on this doesn't give too much of my own spiritual belief away, but if so, oh well), I think I wrote in a previous post that the locked room, the room that Dumbledore says is filled with the same ancient magic that runs in Harry's veins (or lives on in his skin) doesn't contain love in a sentimental or romantic sense, but love in its most profound and mysterious form. It's the love that conquers all, heals all, and understands all, because it contains all things: all hope, all despair, all joy, all sadness, all life, all death, all good and all evil. The closest word in English would probably be truth or perhaps peace; there's the "unified field" theory too, and many religions of course have the word G-d (didn't want to offend anyone by spelling it out). Not that someone probably didn't already say much of this someplace else already (but I have the hardest time finding relevant earlier posts by searching the archives). Anyhow, I hope I'm not sounding too preachy, because I don't want to be -- I'm still only guessing like everyone else. I do feel pretty sure though that JKR's books are obviously very *spiritual,* in that they try to deal with the most troubling and puzzling aspects of life, even though she still manages to inject a lot of wonderful humor and adventure into them too. Kim, who wishes she could turn her 2 knuts into 2 million, but she wouldn't know how to spend them anyway ;-) From cat_kind at yahoo.com Tue Nov 9 18:39:27 2004 From: cat_kind at yahoo.com (cat_kind) Date: Tue, 09 Nov 2004 18:39:27 -0000 Subject: Every Tom, Dick and Harry... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117482 > > SSSusan: > > Interesting! And it's not just that they're common nicknames, but > > that they come from that "Tom, Dick and Harry" grouping. Any ideas > > on who's going to turn out to be Dick, then? :-) > > Finwitch: > > Dick's the Half Blood Prince, I guess... now we just need to find out > his surname. One with a meaning since we have Riddle (in a way, the > prophecy is a riddle too!) and Potter (common enough, a profession > for making pottery out of clay). > > So are we going to have Dick Blue, Dick Noble, Dick King - or maybe > even Dick Prince? (Would make him Prince by name! and everyone's > calling him by surname...) > > Finwitch catkind: Love the theory, Finwitch. But I fear Dicks in children's fiction may have gone the same way as poor Titty in Swallows and Amazons. From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Tue Nov 9 19:01:56 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Tue, 09 Nov 2004 19:01:56 -0000 Subject: Why has DD never suggested Snape thank Harry? (Was: Why has DD never suggest In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117483 Eggplant wrote : " At the time in question Harry had just saved the entire Wizarding world (including Snape) from a terrible fate; in fact although he had not yet reached his 13'Th birthday this was the second time he had done so." Del replies : PS/SS : it's not clear at all whether QuirrellMort would ever have found the way to get to the Stone. Everything points to the fact that he would NOT have been able to retrieve it, since he wanted to use it. And eventually DD would have come back and dealt with him. CoS : even if Diary!Tom had managed to get himself a real body, I really don't think he would have been any real adversary to DD. A nuisance, more like, that DD would have dealt with pretty easily. So I'm not sure what you were talking about, but I can see that up to his 13th birthday, Harry had saved the world "only" once, as a baby, through no merit of his own. Eggplant wrote : " Everybody said that in order to learn Occlumency your mind needs to be as calm as possible," Del replies : Who is that "everybody" ? Snape himself didn't tell Harry to have a calm mind, he told him to *clear* his mind, which is not the same. Eggplant wrote : " Harry repeatedly said that Snape's lessons weakened his ability to resist Voldemort's attacks, everybody seems to ignore this but I think it's important." Del replies : This might simply be because Harry wasn't practicing. Maybe Snape's lessons did indeed open Harry's mind, but this was supposed to be countered by Harry practicing Occlumency every day. Maybe that is the way one learns Occlumency. But Harry didn't practice, rendering the lessons useless and maybe even downright dangerous. After all, if there IS something that "everyone" kept telling Harry, it was to *practice* Occlumency. Del From bboyminn at yahoo.com Tue Nov 9 19:23:56 2004 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Tue, 09 Nov 2004 19:23:56 -0000 Subject: Every Tom, Dick and Harry... & Prince In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117484 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "quigonginger" wrote: > > Finwitch wrote: > > Dick's the Half Blood Prince, I guess... now we just need to find > > out his surname. ... > > > > So are we going to have Dick Blue, Dick Noble, Dick King - or > > maybe even Dick Prince? (Would make him Prince by name! and > > everyone's calling him by surname...) > Ginger: > > Now there's a new one. Could the Prince family be an old wizarding > family (perhaps DE's?) who had a wayward son who met a Muggle? Or > could they be an old Muggle family, one of whom chanced to fall in > love with a witch? > > Now is "Dick" Prince a new student, or a student who Harry hasn't > noticed yet? (gasp! the good Slytherin) or an adult? > > So many questions. I kind of like this. It's a different take than > trying to infuse royalty into the picture. Too bad all the RL royal > males are too old for Hogwarts. > > Ginger, bboyminn: Slightly OT, but Prince William was born in 1982 and Prince Harry was born in 1984. Harry on the other hand was born in 1980. Prince William - June 21, 1982 (William Arthur Philip Louis Windsor) Prince Harry - September 16, '84 (Prince Henry Charles Albert David Windsor) I've often fantasized about a meeting between the Princes of the Real world and the 'princes' (Harry & Ron) of the wizard world. In this fantasy, P.Will and P.Harry received Hogwarts letters but because of their high profile highly public lives, they were unable to attend. Also, let's not forget that there are other assorted Princes lurking about the UK, like Prince Andrew. In addition, the House of Windsor has direct family ties to the Royal houses of Denmark, Greece, Russia, and Germany (maybe more; Norway, Sweden, Belgium, Netherlands, Spain, Monaco?). The Monarchy Today- http://www.royal.gov.uk/output/Page6.asp So, theoretically, there could be, somewhere in that vast expanse of UK related European royalty, a wizard or two. Also, keep in mind that it is not just the son of a King who is a prince, but the son of a prince. Prince Will & Prince Harry are the sons of Prince Charles. One would also assume that sons of a princess are also Princes. Considering the House of Windsor's many international blood ties, that makes for a lot of potential princes to be lurking about. Then add to that all the Princes who are not related to the Windsors. Side note: The current Windsor famil was previous named 'Saxe-Coburg-Gotha'. So, that would solve the 'Prince' aspect in an interesting way, now if I could just think of a way to tie in the Half-Blood part. Since the focus is on the /prince/ we would logically assume that he is the magical person in the family. So, to be half-blood, I suppose he could either be half-royal/half-commoner, or half magic/half muggle. Now all we have to do is decide if he is a literal prince or a metaphorical prince. Although, I have argued in the past for a metaphorical prince, I think it would be interesting if JKR could tie the actual royal family of some European country to the wizard world. Just a thought. Steve/bboyminn (was bboy_mn) (who hopes Dick's last name is not Gosinia ;) ) From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Tue Nov 9 19:26:55 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Tue, 09 Nov 2004 19:26:55 -0000 Subject: Why has DD never suggested Snape thank Harry? (Was: Why has DD never suggested H In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117485 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "mommystery2003" wrote: > I have to disagree here. It was proven in the first book that Snape > is looking after Harry. snip. Alla: I disagree. What was proven in the first book is that Snape saved Harry's life. Is that a good deed? Yes, definitely. Does it mean that Snape "looks after" Harry? Not necessarily. It could have mean exactly what Dumbledore said that Snape was looking forward to pay his debt and continue hating his memory in peace. Snape deserves credit for that, but Eggplant was saying that Harry deserves much more credit from Snape for saving everybody multiple times and never getting any. From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Tue Nov 9 19:44:45 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Tue, 09 Nov 2004 19:44:45 -0000 Subject: Dursleys abuse In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117486 > Pippin: > She doesn't, you know. She could have sent him along to the > orphanage, or put him in foster care. She wasn't Harry's > godmother and she hadn't accepted responsibility for Harry > before he got dumped on her. > > Once she accepted the responsibility, she could have done > better by Harry -- but then again, her idea of "better" is the way > she treats Dudley, which is why I think Dumbledore was wiser to > leave her alone than to force her to be "nice" to Harry. Alla: Sorry, Pippin but she does in my book. I realise though that it might be cultural thing. Being a close family, namely a sister means to me among other things that if your sister died, you will take in her child. It is just what family does, IMO, especially close family. Drifting a little bit OT, but I hope it will illustrate the point. There are very few customs of the american society, which I dislike and will never be able to follow. Among those is putting your parents (who are old, but in a good health)in the nursing home. I am not talking about very ill people, who can only be helped in the hospital or in the home. I know that I am supposed to take care of my parents, not to dump them on the state, even if it will mean some hardships for me. They are my responsibility, just like I was theirs for quite some time. Again, I realise that it is a cultural thing,because in the soviet union people did not move around much, but lived together or close by all their life. Nevertheless, to me is what close family does - takes care of one another, especially in such tragic circumstances, as Harry turned out to be. Pippin: > And while I can't say much in Petunia's defense, I could certainly > understand if the British equivalent of child protective services > had more pressing cases on its hands. I would hate to think of it > devoting its resources to investigating the Dursleys while other > children were being *routinely* beaten, starved, kept home from > school because they had no glasses or shoes, etc. Alla: Oh, of course, absolutely. Much worse cases of abuse could be easily imagined and happen routinely in RL. I just take strong exception to the thesis that what Dursleys did to Harry is not abuse at all. Del: snip. > I don't approve of what she and Vernon did, but I can't completely > blame them either. They are only human, and what was asked of them was inhuman in my idea, especially without giving them help or at least keeping a watchful eye on them. Alla: What was asked of Dursleys, IMO was an emergency, which under any other circumstances (I hope) Dumbledore would not do. I think that under those circumstances Petunia had to take Harry in (which she did) and treat him decently, if not lovingly(which she did not) . Did Petunia resent Lily? Of course. Should she be blamed for thos efeelings? Not really, since we cannot help feeling one way or another. Should she be blamed for taking her resentment or whatever out to Harry? Yes, definitely, IMO. I said it is easy for me to argue the other side for Snape, but since I don't , Petunia's feelings remind me of Snape feelings of Harry, IF I am reading them correctly, of course. Petunia cannot just stop feeling resentment of Lily and transfers it to Harry. Snape cannot stop feeling hatred of James and transfers it to Harry (again, if I am correct, of course) Could they be ordered not to feel that way anymore? No, of course, not. Should they be able to suppress those feelings enough in order not to take it out on Harry? YES. Their rational mind has to grasp the idea that Harry (not Lily and not James) did not do anything to them. From nkafkafi at yahoo.com Tue Nov 9 19:47:43 2004 From: nkafkafi at yahoo.com (nkafkafi) Date: Tue, 09 Nov 2004 19:47:43 -0000 Subject: Unreliable narrator (Was: Snape's stalling) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117487 > Pippin: > Perhaps we should also distinguish between the character's > words and actions, and the reader's perception of those words > and actions. > > It seems to me that what I shall call Fanon!Lupin is as much the > product of reader speculation, conjecture and outright disregard > of canon as that admittedly noncanonical beast Fanon!Draco. > > By Fanon!Lupin, I mean the adorable werewolf cub, who > > Whereas canon Lupin: > I realize it's very unconventional to make a sympathetic character > the villain, especially in what some of us think of as a children's > book. In that sense, considering Lupin as a potential villain > requires a subversive reading. But JKR has said all along that > her bad guys are not conventional black hats. Neri: At the risk of repeating my repetitions of myself, I must maintain that my analysis of the night of the MoM battle raises at least as much suspicion against Snape. And I didn't even use Snape's words against him, as you did with Lupin. All the suspicions I raised regarding Snape's actions during that night are based on hard canon or, at the very least, DD's words (like "Snape realized you saw Voldemort holding Sirius in the DoM"), words that DD say while *defending* Snape. The suspicions I raised against Snape are not based on any "unreliable narrator", since they don't follow Harry's suspicions (which the narrator tells us are only backlash of Harry's own guilt feelings) but instead uncover canon facts that Harry didn't notice. And, needless to say, these suspicions do not fit with Fanon! Snape, which seems to have more fans (in HPfGU at least) than Fanon! Lupin and Fanon!Draco together. And still, although it were several months since we analyzed Snape's actions and timeline during that night, no one has based an ESE!Snape theory on it. So basically, what you have against Lupin is a list of disturbing suspicions, similar to the list of disturbing suspicions I raised against Snape. Most items in both these lists can be explained as honest mistakes of the character or as mistakes of JKR or with all kinds of speculative excuses and fanfiction, but in the end the question whether you would believe such ESE theories comes down to simple trust: do you trust this character or don't you. Neri From kethryn at wulfkub.com Tue Nov 9 20:00:16 2004 From: kethryn at wulfkub.com (Kethryn) Date: Tue, 9 Nov 2004 15:00:16 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Dursleys abuse References: Message-ID: <00c601c4c696$bd449900$0402a8c0@carolina.rr.com> No: HPFGUIDX 117488 > I'm sure if the Dursleys had any idea that it was good for Harry to > sleep in that cupboard they'd've removed him forthwith, but a > windowless bedroom isn't a bad idea if you are worried about > wizards who need eye contact in order to curse you, especially if > even a curse that bounces off is likely to cause a good deal of > damage to those around you. > Pippin Kethryn now, Pippen, you just got the brain a churning with your comment there. What is the safest and most easily defensible room in the house? The one with no outside access, of course. The cupboard under the stairs is perfect to keep Harry safe, actually, from prying eyes to tornados (I don't believe that GB has earthquakes like So. Cal. does) to evil wizards that want a piece of the boy. And, hell, from the media that shall not be mentioned, it really didn't look at that bad other than the dust. So, anyways, just a thought. Kethryn From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Tue Nov 9 20:24:13 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Tue, 09 Nov 2004 20:24:13 -0000 Subject: Why has DD never suggested Snape thank Harry? (Was: Why has DD never suggest In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117489 > Del replies : > CoS : even if Diary!Tom had managed to get himself a real body, I > really don't think he would have been any real adversary to DD. A > nuisance, more like, that DD would have dealt with pretty easily. Alla: We don't know that. He dealt with Ginny pretty easily and who knows what wonderful things he could have started doing if he got a body. And as Pippin said, Dumbledore was not even at achool at the moment. So, Ginny would have been dead and young Voldemort on the loose again, had Harry did not go to the Chamber. In my book it does count as saving the WW from Voldemort. From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Tue Nov 9 20:43:34 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Tue, 09 Nov 2004 20:43:34 -0000 Subject: Dursleys abuse In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117490 Alla wrote : "What was asked of Dursleys, IMO was an emergency, which under any other circumstances (I hope) Dumbledore would not do. I think that under those circumstances Petunia had to take Harry in (which she did) and treat him decently, if not lovingly(which she did not) ." Del replies : I still disagree. There's no law that says that we should love our kids, and there's definitely no law that says that we should love our orphaned nephews. It might be a moral thing to do for some people, but that doesn't mean that Petunia *had* to treat Harry lovingly. As for decency, it's a vague concept that means widely different things for different people. The Dursleys obviously think that feeding, clothing and sheltering Harry was sufficiently decent. Alla wrote : "Did Petunia resent Lily? Of course. Should she be blamed for thos efeelings? Not really, since we cannot help feeling one way or another. Should she be blamed for taking her resentment or whatever out to Harry? Yes, definitely, IMO." Del replies : I disagree. Petunia knew she couldn't stand her sister and her family. She had taken every possible measures to insure that she would never have to deal with them. Dumping Harry on her was cruel and disrespectful of her feelings and desires. It's like forcing a cat on someone who is allergic to them and expecting them to be nice to the cat. Alla wrote : " I said it is easy for me to argue the other side for Snape, but since I don't , Petunia's feelings remind me of Snape feelings of Harry, IF I am reading them correctly, of course. Petunia cannot just stop feeling resentment of Lily and transfers it to Harry. Snape cannot stop feeling hatred of James and transfers it to Harry (again, if I am correct, of course) Could they be ordered not to feel that way anymore? No, of course, not. Should they be able to suppress those feelings enough in order not to take it out on Harry? YES. Their rational mind has to grasp the idea that Harry (not Lily and not James) did not do anything to them." Del replies : There are several BIG difference between Snape and Petunia. 1. Snape could have chosen to stop teaching when Harry came to Hogwarts, while Petunia didn't have a choice. Snape *chose* to be a teacher, Petunia did NOT choose to be Lily's only blood relative. 2. Snape is simply irritated by the sheer sight of Harry, which is irrational. Petunia on the other hand has *good* reasons to dislike Harry : he takes money and other resources away from Dudley, he is a wizard (OK, this one is irrational, but it's one that defines Petunia), he can bring big troubles to the Dursleys (Dudley *did* get attacked in OoP), and so on. Harry IS a burden to the Dursleys, while he's not to Snape. 3. Snape knew that Harry would someday come to Hogwarts, so he could have chosen to work on his feelings. Petunia had every reason to believe that she wouldn't even meet her nephew for many years, if ever. She never had any time to prepare herself to meet Harry. 4. Snape had to deal with an 11-year-old Harry. Petunia was landed with a toddler. A 15-month-old kid is A LOT of work, especially when you already have a barely older kid yourself. 5. Snape only has to deal with Harry a few hours a week. Petunia had to deal with Harry 24/7 at first, and still mornings, evenings, week-ends and holidays later. She *never* had a "Harry-holiday", except on Dudley's birthdays. In short : Harry is merely more than an annoyance to Snape, who could indeed make an effort. But Harry changed Petunia's life for the worst *forever*. The time and effort and money that she and Vernon spent on Harry instead of spending them on Dudley can *never* be retrieved. All the fear and anger and frustration that Harry brought into their lives can never be taken away. Harry *spoiled* the perfect life they had worked so hard to achieve. There's one last thing to consider : the Dursleys are bad parents *by nature*. They are mistreating both Harry and Dudley, though not in the same way. They don't *know* what *really* loving a child means. Del From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Tue Nov 9 20:58:16 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Tue, 09 Nov 2004 20:58:16 -0000 Subject: Why has DD never suggested Snape thank Harry? (Was: Why has DD never suggest In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117491 I, Del, wrote earlier : " CoS : even if Diary!Tom had managed to get himself a real body, I really don't think he would have been any real adversary to DD. A nuisance, more like, that DD would have dealt with pretty easily." Alla answered : "We don't know that. He dealt with Ginny pretty easily and who knows what wonderful things he could have started doing if he got a body." Del replies : Ginny was a first-year ! No comparison with any teacher in school (well, any *real* teacher, not Lockhart or Trelawney). As for the wonderful things : he would still have been a 16-year-old Tom Riddle. Pretty powerful and advanced *for his age*, but no match for DD or the Aurors. Alla wrote : " And as Pippin said, Dumbledore was not even at achool at the moment." Del replies : Agreed. But McGonagall, Snape, Flitwick were. I can't believe that they couldn't have dealt with Tom. Alla wrote : "So, Ginny would have been dead and young Voldemort on the loose again, had Harry did not go to the Chamber." Del replies : Ginny being dead would have been the only *sure* tragedy in all this that I can see. Harry saved her, no doubt. But a 16-year-old Tom Riddle would only have been another DE-kid type. *Potentially* dangerous, for sure, but not before many years. Alla wrote : "In my book it does count as saving the WW from Voldemort." Del replies : Not in mine. Harry saved Ginny, agreed. He may also have saved the world a bit of trouble, but honestly : 16-year-old Tom was NOT a threat to the WW at large. He might have killed a few other people (he did know the AK curse, after all), granted, but he would eventually have been stopped by DD or the Aurors or whoever. Del From olivier.fouquet+harry at m4x.org Tue Nov 9 21:28:41 2004 From: olivier.fouquet+harry at m4x.org (olivier.fouquet+harry at m4x.org) Date: Tue, 9 Nov 2004 22:28:41 +0100 Subject: Unreliable narrator and faulty perception of Lupin Message-ID: <53ECF8F8-3296-11D9-8B31-000A95665DE8@m4x.org> No: HPFGUIDX 117492 > Sirius have told you if *they'd* changed the plan" (emphasis > mine) -PoA 373 ch 19 > > -"thought Sirius killed Peter" p351 ch 18 > > -"convinced [himself] that Sirius was getting into the school > using dark arts he learned from Voldemort" p 356 ch 18 > > - never tells us why he didn't realize he was going to transform > > - expresses no surprise at the sudden appearance of Snape in > the Shrieking Shack > > -has spoken against Umbridge "I know she's a nasty piece of > work though -- you should hear Remus talk about her." OOP 302 > ch 14 > >> Pippin I don't deny any of the above. However, I second Neri (in almost all he/she wrote and especially in) that we could mention a character that: 1) Was a Death Eater, and Moody at least had some doubts that he changed allegiance. 2) Was keen about the Dark Arts. 3) Calls Voldemort the Dark Lord and certainly never says anything against him. 4) Is suspiciously passive and absent in OoP. In fact, he is the sole member of the Order whose contribution is apparently nil. Yet, neither you Pippin nor I suspect Snape. Because, as Neri said, deep down we chose to trust him (and we hope Harry will learn to do likewise). Now, Lupin has done mistakes in the past, this is certain, but he has acknowledged them, apologized and taken responsibility for them. In OoP, he is nothing (speculation aside) that a reasonable guy who tries to keep Sirius calm while trying to comfort Molly. This is why I for the time being choose to trust him, though he is (like Snape and like every character safe possibly Dumbledore) a deeply flawed character. It is true that somethings feel curious in PoA, however I think the standard explanation is that JKR needed those surprise in order to build the best possible climax in the Shrieking Shack. Besides, supposing an evil Lupin makes the ending of PoA less plausible than a good Lupin (at least in my opinion). Why didn't an evil Lupin kill Sirius (one order member down and the only one to know that Pettigrew is still alive) and joined with Pettigrew? He could also have killed Snape and why not Harry, Ron and Hermione pour faire bonne mesure (as we say in french). He did nothing of the sort. And what about Trelawney's second prediction? Lupin has been free the last 12 years. Now, Dumbledore trusts Lupin, and so do I (and most HP readers). Maybe we are all mistaken, but I strongly deny we are confident solely on preconceptions and faulty perception of him. Olivier From ginnysthe1 at yahoo.com Tue Nov 9 21:45:26 2004 From: ginnysthe1 at yahoo.com (ginnysthe1) Date: Tue, 09 Nov 2004 21:45:26 -0000 Subject: Dursleys abuse In-Reply-To: <00c601c4c696$bd449900$0402a8c0@carolina.rr.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117494 Pippin wrote: > ... I'm sure if the Dursleys had any idea that it was good for Harry to sleep in that cupboard they'd've removed him forthwith, but a windowless bedroom isn't a bad idea if you are worried about wizards who need eye contact in order to curse you, especially if even a curse that bounces off is likely to cause a good deal of damage to those around you.< Kethryn replied: >Pippen, you just got the brain a churning with your comment there. What is the safest and most easily defensible room in the house? The one with no outside access, of course. The cupboard under the stairs is perfect to keep Harry safe, actually, from prying eyes to tornados (I don't believe that GB has earthquakes like So. Cal. does) to evil wizards that want a piece of the boy. And, hell, from the media that shall not be mentioned, it really didn't look at that bad other than the dust. So, anyways, just a thought.< Kim chiming into your interesting thread with a question (which she asks you to please ignore if it's going over old ground): Do you think it's possible that Dumbledore *asked* the Dursleys to keep Harry *someplace safe* while he was living with them? If I'm not confusing canon with the movies, whoever sent the letters to inform Harry about his coming to school at Hogwarts knew that Harry was living in the cupboard under the stairs and addressed the letters as such, so one might assume the venerable Dumbledore knew this as well. The really big problem I have with the cupboard as Harry's bedroom was the fact that it could be locked from the outside -- a tad *too safe* if you ask me. Kim From ginnysthe1 at yahoo.com Tue Nov 9 21:53:00 2004 From: ginnysthe1 at yahoo.com (ginnysthe1) Date: Tue, 09 Nov 2004 21:53:00 -0000 Subject: Brain room Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117495 Thought I'd throw out a potentially nonsensical question (from the long list generated by recently re-reading the last chapters of OotP): You know that Brain Room in the Dept. of Mysteries? Whose brains did they used to be? Do you think it matters? Kim, who can't seem to get those brains out of her brain, which points to the possibility that there's lots of empty room in there... ;-) From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Tue Nov 9 22:04:52 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Tue, 09 Nov 2004 22:04:52 -0000 Subject: Why has DD never suggested Snape thank Harry? (Was: Why has DD never suggest In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117496 > Del replies : > Not in mine. Harry saved Ginny, agreed. He may also have saved the > world a bit of trouble, but honestly : 16-year-old Tom was NOT a > threat to the WW at large. He might have killed a few other people > (he did know the AK curse, after all), granted, but he would > eventually have been stopped by DD or the Aurors or whoever. > Alla: Hmmm. It is quite possible that 16 year old Tom was not that powerful yet. It is equally possible that he was already very deep in Dark Arts and very powerful. So, again,we don't know one way or another, IMO From foxmoth at qnet.com Tue Nov 9 23:00:31 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Tue, 09 Nov 2004 23:00:31 -0000 Subject: Unreliable narrator (Was: Snape's stalling) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117497 > > Neri: > > At the risk of repeating my repetitions of myself, I must maintain that my analysis of the night of the MoM battle raises at least as much suspicion against Snape.< Okay, now I get it. You're saying that Rowling may have hidden a clue about Snape in the same manner as I contend she has hidden clues about Lupin, and I, in my pro-Snape bias, failed to give the possibility due weight. You could be right, in which case you have discovered a genuine red herring (assuming that Snape is not ESE!) and I take off my virtual hat to you. Of course if a character points out that it was a far more serious fault than Harry imagines for Snape not to go to the forest in immediate pursuit, that will only point up that it was a far more serious fault than Harry imagines for Lupin not to tell what he knew about Sirius, the map, or the unguarded secret entrance into the castle. It will, BTW, emphasize that the narrator is unreliable, in not bringing these faults to our attention as they occurred. You see, I really *am* interested in narrative technique, though I will admit that sometimes my biases get in the way. Pippin From gbannister10 at aol.com Tue Nov 9 23:06:54 2004 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Tue, 09 Nov 2004 23:06:54 -0000 Subject: Why has DD never suggested Snape thank Harry? (Was: Why has DD never suggested H In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117498 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "mommystery2003" wrote: Ces: > I have to disagree here. It was proven in the first book that Snape > is looking after Harry. But does Harry, when everything is over and > knowing that Snape was not the total evil "git" he had been made out > to be, thank him for looking out for him? No, he conveniently > glosses over that and continues his hatred of Snape (which I will > fully admit is justified in the treatment he receives from Snape). > It wouldn't have cost him much to go up to the man and thank him. > But he doesn't. I do think Dumbledore should have prodded Harry to thank Snape, but I > think he was hoping Harry would do it on his own. But the Harry I > have seen throughout these books is somewhat selfish and does think > himself above the rules. He justifies his ends forgetting the fact > that most times he started the whole ball rolling downhill in the > first place. Geoff: Come on folks, let's get real. When Harry is told that Snape saved him, he is approaching 12 years old. Snape is a formidable character who is feared by the pupils. What does Harry expect will happen if he gets anywhere near Snape? Sneering? House points taken off? Will Snape even give him a chance to say anything? His experiences with Snape are negative, patronising and demeaning. There is no motivation to get within a mile of the man. I cna remember having a teacher when I was in the First Year whom we all feared. He was sarcastic and sadistic and no way would I have approached him voluntarily... Geoff http://www.aspectsofexmoor.com From R.Vink2 at chello.nl Tue Nov 9 23:20:01 2004 From: R.Vink2 at chello.nl (Renee) Date: Tue, 09 Nov 2004 23:20:01 -0000 Subject: Bad guys and black hats (was Re: Unreliable narrator) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117499 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "pippin_999" wrote: > Pippin: > Perhaps we should also distinguish between the character's > words and actions, and the reader's perception of those words > and actions. > It seems to me that what I shall call Fanon!Lupin is as much the > product of reader speculation, conjecture and outright disregard > of canon as that admittedly noncanonical beast Fanon!Draco. Renee: "The" reader doesn't exist, so I'd say that every reader can only speak for her/himself. Moreover, no reader can really make such a distinction as you propose, because it's impossible to separate text and perception. A reader can point out factual errors, as you did with your fanon!Lupin list, but that's about it. That fanon!Lupin is at odds with the text doesn't automatically tell us what we are to make of canon!Lupin. > I realize it's very unconventional to make a sympathetic character > the villain, especially in what some of us think of as a children's > book. In that sense, considering Lupin as a potential villain > requires a subversive reading. But JKR has said all along that > her bad guys are not conventional black hats. > Renee: Did she put it exactly like this? (Quote, please?) Because I can't help thinking that a lot of JKR's bad guys, including the chief villain, *are* fairly conventional black hats. I'd be disappointed if she really said this, and it would reinforce my opinion that authors should refrain from explaining their own texts. Or did she perhaps say that not all her bad guys are conventional black hats? In that case, the most likely interpretation of the statement is that not every bad guy is a Death Eater, to paraphrase Sirius. (Just like the Balrog and Shelob in Tolkien's LotR do not serve Sauron yet easily qualify as agents of evil.) I can think of a few examples: ministry people like Fudge and Umbridge, but also Sirius's' parents, who were Dark Wizards yet unlike his brother didn't join Voldemort. And a character like Crouch Sr., though maybe not truly bad, does what he perceives to be the right thing with disastrous results. This serves to add depth to the series and make it more interesting. However, characters that look okay to non-subversive readers but turn out to have been Voldemort supporters all along for whatever reasons of their own, are ultimately no more than conventional black hats. They undermine the statement, instead of confirming it. Renee From R.Vink2 at chello.nl Tue Nov 9 23:34:43 2004 From: R.Vink2 at chello.nl (Renee) Date: Tue, 09 Nov 2004 23:34:43 -0000 Subject: Dursleys abuse In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117500 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "delwynmarch" wrote: > > Alla wrote : > "What was asked of Dursleys, IMO was an emergency, which under any > other circumstances (I hope) Dumbledore would not do. > > I think that under those circumstances Petunia had to take Harry in > (which she did) and treat him decently, if not lovingly(which she did > not) ." > > Del replies : > I still disagree. There's no law that says that we should love our > kids, and there's definitely no law that says that we should love our > orphaned nephews. It might be a moral thing to do for some people, but > that doesn't mean that Petunia *had* to treat Harry lovingly. > Renee: What I would suggest is that we don't treat Petunia too much like a separate entity. There's Vernon, too. He resents being saddled with his wife's baby nephew - the boy is in no way related to him, so he doesn't feel a shred of obligation there. Quite possibly - gasp - Petunia actually loves Vernon, or at least did so when Harry entered their household. Vernon hates the boy, and she's simply not prepared to turn against him on Harry's behalf. I never get the impression she's the dominant partner; does she put her foot down more than once? Renee From ginnysthe1 at yahoo.com Tue Nov 9 23:39:00 2004 From: ginnysthe1 at yahoo.com (ginnysthe1) Date: Tue, 09 Nov 2004 23:39:00 -0000 Subject: The Riddles' Murders (WAS: The only one he ever feared? In-Reply-To: <20041108145321.53318.qmail@web52905.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117501 Debbie wrote: > The only argument that supports the notion that the MoM must have known about it is that if the Improper Use of Magic Office employs countrywide surveillance, Mafalda Hopkirk's predecessor should have picked up on it. But I doubt they keep track of very much, or they would've noticed Mundungus Fletcher disapparating at 4 Privet Drive at the beginning of OOP.< JP replied: > Correct me if I'm wrong but my impression is that the Improper Use of Magic Office does not focus on the use of magic on murders, apparitions etc... I think that the Office focuses on underage magic, use of Muggle artifacts to play practcally jokes or to harm Muggles and such. Even if the magic done by wizards were "bad", it is not "improper" because using magic when your "of age" is allowed and I think that you'll need to get a licence to apparate, so logically, the Office of Improper Use of Magic had not known the Riddle murders because it was simply not their job to monitor them.< Kim now: But then the deaths of three Riddles from Avada Kedavras would surely have been considered "harm to Muggles," as you say. Besides that the MoM Improper Use Office would have noticed the three AKs in Little Hangleton because Tom Riddle Jr. (young Lord Voldemort) *was* underage at the time (at least it appears from canon that he was either 16 or 17). (Which leads to another question which may have been asked many times before -- what age is "of age" for wizards? Sorry, my brain is a little swiss-cheesy today) In any case, AK (Avada Kedavra) is also an Unforgiveable Curse and it wouldn't matter if the wizard who performed it was "of age" -- performing AK, Crucio, or Imperius curses is supposed to land you in Azkaban. The MoM would have known about the 3 Muggles dying from AKs in Little Hangleton or else they were asleep on the job that day. Kim From madettebeau at gmail.com Tue Nov 9 23:45:15 2004 From: madettebeau at gmail.com (madlysarcastic) Date: Tue, 09 Nov 2004 23:45:15 -0000 Subject: Brain room In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117502 Kim wrote: "You know that Brain Room in the Dept. of Mysteries? Whose brains did they used to be? Do you think it matters?" Maddy writes: I've wondered about the brains as well, but I hadn't even thought of who the brains might have belonged to. It is a creepy thought though, isn't it? I mean, I believe that some university had Albert Enstein's brain preserved for study, but the fact that the brains are described as "swimming" (or at least that's how I remember it; don't have my book on hand) makes them seem as though they are somehow *alive*. And that is want irks me the most about them. After Ron summons a brain, it has "tentacles" that try to strangle him. And if IRC they seem to display a projection of thoughts of some sort, don't they? Perhaps the liquid that they were in has some magical properties in them that keeps them from decaying, but also keeps them active somehow. Something I did wonder about with respect to the brains is how Ron will be affected by his contact with one of them. Didn't Hermione say that Madame Pomfrey had said that memories/thoughts from someone else's brain can do far more damage than his other wounds? I've wonder if Ron will start having memories or something from the person who's brain that was? Maybe it's similar to a legillimens/occlumens process...only instead of having your own memories broken into, someone else forces their memories onto you. Curiouser and curiouser. =) Maddy From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Tue Nov 9 23:49:36 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Tue, 09 Nov 2004 23:49:36 -0000 Subject: Occlumency: Relax or resist? (Was: CHAPTER DISCUSSION: Chapter 29, Career Ad In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117503 > > Carol, hoping that the canon citations are sufficient to support and validate her point > Lupinlore wrote: > No Carol, I'm afraid they are not. The canon citations you make are > sufficient to show that, under Snape's tutelage, Harry finally > managed *something*. That isn't, in and of itself, particularly > impressive nor does it necessarily speak well of Snape's teaching > methods. > There is also another way of interpreting the references you have > given, which is that Snape partially succeeds in spite of himself. I > have no doubt that the methods Snape uses are those he thinks are > effective. However, if ever there was a hypocrite it is him. Clear > your mind of emotion? His mind is so choked and clogged by emotion > that it has warped his entire life! > > Indeed, although Snape is a Master Occlumens, I wonder if he > understands Occlumency very well. I suspect he is a natural at > Occlumency, but not for the reasons he believes. Perhaps in the end > Occlumency doesn't require clearing your mind, but martialing strong > and violent emotion in its defense. Snape is so constantly in the > grip of emotion that he fools himself into thinking that he is > clearing his mind and mastering himself when in fact all he is doing > is deploying his perpetual rage and bitterness as a shield. It would help explain the difference between Snape's instruction to *clear your mind* and Dumbledore's observation that Harry will be saved by his emotions. Carol responds: Lupinlore, you aren't citing canon of your own here, and you're not answering my arguments or even quoting them. All you've quoted is my closing, followed by your own generalizations with no indication of how they relate to my argument. Your assertion that you're afraid my canon-based examples don't validate my argument is not very convincing under the circumstances. Rather than generalizing about Snape's inability to master his emotions, you might look at those instances when he *does* succeed. I'll come back to your arguments and answer them if you'll go upthread and actually examine mine (rather than snipping them) and present canon of your own to counter my quotations. If we could eliminate the concept of martial-arts based relaxation, it would help to eliminate a great deal of confusion. No analogies, please; let's just consider whether *resistance*--which is what Snape is asking Harry to do--might not be exactly what Occlumency requires. Again, if you want to persuade me that I'm mistaken, you can't just snip my arguments and sweep them all away with your own opinion. You have to actually answer them using canon and logic. (Analogies don't prove anything and are in fact a logical fallacy.) Carol From kelsey_dangelo at yahoo.com Tue Nov 9 04:21:10 2004 From: kelsey_dangelo at yahoo.com (Kelsey Dangelo) Date: Mon, 8 Nov 2004 20:21:10 -0800 (PST) Subject: Dirty Harry/Clean Harry (Harry's good core) In-Reply-To: <1099960739.6682.66592.m7@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <20041109042110.5912.qmail@web53105.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 117504 Catlady wrote: < Riddle WANTED to do evil, cruel things -- he wanted to hurt people and be feared -- rather than wanting e.g. to be let alone to discover the first language humans ever spoke by learning all modern and ancient languages and finding what they have in common. It seems very clear that Riddle's cruelty and hate came from rage at what he suffered as a child, but what caused Bellatrix's cruelty and hate? >> (Siriusly Snapey Susan wrote: < Harry may have been one of those kids who, having nothing & being bullied, rather than succumbing simply chose to try to be different. And when it FELT GOOD, he knew it was the right course. It's not THAT uncommon, nor do I find it to be unbelievable. >> "If it feels good, do it"? Well, I don't think "If it feels bad, do it" is any better a guide to ethical behavior. Kelsey replies now: I think that you're right, that Harry chooses to help people and not to hurt people, but I believe that this is part of his intrinsic ability/motivation of his morally good core. Which came first (his actions or his moral core) is a matter of which came first, the chicken or the egg? Harry is so GOOD, and he's a moral brick wall of goodness, in the sense that his moral senses are impenetrable and indestructible and stubborn. It gets chipped and damaged once in a while, but its steadfast. He won't hurt someone and he'll do what is morally right (i.e. he's not going to steal from the poor or kill people for the greater good). I like your point about how Riddle wants to do evil, cruel things, to be evil. I think that TR/Voldie is just evil. He likes it. He's Harry's moral polar opposite. He chooses to be evil because that's what he is. I think he enjoys it. It's his style. He enjoys being powerful and hurting people and gaining things he wants. Voldie isn't a misguided creature that thinks he's doing something good for wizardkind (that job's reserved for Fudge). He's like Iago of _Othello_. He's perfectly aware of a greater moral code; he just likes to be bad. He's evil, he likes it, he's good at it, he has no excuses. So, if that is the case, I just think that Harry is the opposite. He's good. Catlady replied: >> But plenty of real life people who have the capacity for love also have the capacity to do evil things and become murderers. << Kelsey again: Yes, that is sort of the point that I made elsewhere in that post. Why is Voldie incapable of love? I just don't understand that. I don't see how that is humanly possible. That's not the way things are in real life. But that's what JKR says, so it must be so. You're right, "plenty of real life people who have the capacity for love also have the capacity to do evil things". That's why it's impossible for any real person to be evil through and through. That's why people make mistakes and make moral compromises and sacrifices. But Harry is not real. He's not a real person. His arch nemesis is not a real person (as I explained above). On a cellular level, in his daily school activities, facing the strains of adolescent hormones and obnoxious teachers and cheating on homework, Harry is a real boy. But when it comes to epic showdowns, he's Harry the Hero, the Boy Who Lived, the boy capable of love and born of moral goodness (however you want to read that as Utilitarian or Kantian). He's the one who saves Peter Pettigrew and rushes to save Sirius and Ginny and Hogwarts, the boy who waits for all hostages to be saved from the merpeople. He's the hero figure that we all hope to be when we face the epic showdowns. [I'm not saying that all characters in the Potterverse are unreal. Sirius Black is very capable of love and murder. So is, in my opinion, Lucius Malfoy. In fact, for some characters, moral ambiguity and heinous acts are born out of love. I think that Harry will have to face a big moral dilemma on the issue of love and heinous acts (i.e. a debate between the greater good and doing the right thing). I just think that he'll choose the righteous and heroic path, as a any hero character that stands as a "figure" would.] I still think that a good hero character, who's main strength is love, isn't going to commit mass-murder or atrocious acts for a "greater good" because it would cause him to become like his polar opposite, his nemesis, Voldie. His intentions would be different, but his actions and consequences would be the same. Kelsey. From legobaty29 at yahoo.co.uk Tue Nov 9 13:37:57 2004 From: legobaty29 at yahoo.co.uk (legobaty29) Date: Tue, 09 Nov 2004 13:37:57 -0000 Subject: Department of Mysteries Locked Room In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117505 > Snow: > > Could it be that the door is locked out of protection? Is this > symbolized by the way Harry (the one who has so much of the power > within this room) is locked away from the wizarding world in a closet > under the stairs in a muggle home protected by his mother's sacrifice > and compounded with Dumbledore's added protection? Legobaty: I love this suggestion! I think we are going to find out a lot more about the power that Harry has and why it works so well, and the idea of a room full of it just suggests massive potential for overpowering LV at the end of the series. Perhaps the power can only be used by Harry, at an appropriate time. Perhaps he is the only one who can use it, but not until he is ready? From elsyee_h at yahoo.com Wed Nov 10 00:27:25 2004 From: elsyee_h at yahoo.com (Tammy) Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2004 00:27:25 -0000 Subject: Of Age In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117506 > Kim wrote: (Which leads to another question which may have > been asked many times before -- what age is "of age" for wizards? > Sorry, my brain is a little swiss-cheesy today) > Tammy replies: 17 is "of age", as Fred and George are 17 in OotP (remember the part where it's pointed out that only "of age" wizards are allowed to join the Order, and Fred and George jump as if to volunteer and are told that they must also be out of school?... should be joining the Order in HBP :P ) From jiggsvelasco at yahoo.com Tue Nov 9 19:51:54 2004 From: jiggsvelasco at yahoo.com (jp velasco) Date: Tue, 9 Nov 2004 11:51:54 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Department of Mysteries Locked Room In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041109195154.72202.qmail@web52904.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 117507 Glavgirl: Wanted to get your thoughts on the locked room in Department of Mysteries. When Harry is trying to find the right door to enter, he goes to the locked door and tries everything to open it. It was odd that it melted the knife that Sirius had given him. In the end of the book, Dumbledore told Harry that there was a locked room in the Department of Mysteries that holds that power that Harry possess. We know it was his heart that kept Voldemort from possessing him for any amount of time. Any ideas on what "power" is behind the locked door? It would be hard to lock up feelings in a room. Especially something that would melt a knife. JP here I think that the "power" that is locked in the Department of Mysteries is an emotion. Maybe it's Love or Faith or whatever but i remember somewhere in canon that Harry's Mom transfered this kind of power to him when she sacrificed herself to save her son. and in GoF, Voldy said that the power that was transfered by Lily to Harry is an ancient kind of power. it's so ancient that Voldy forgot about it. I also think that it is safe to assume that the fields of study that the Dept. of Mysteries concerns itself deals with the unexplainable in our world. (Time, Thoughts and Memories, Prophecies, Death, etc...) so I think that Love is the thing that is locked up in the Dept. DD also stated that this power (Love) is dangerous and at the same time wonderful and in my opinion is taken for granted by Voldy. That's why Voldy wasn't able to posses Harry all the way because his heart is full of Love... for Sirius and for everbody else that Voldy can not achieve or understand. --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From jiggsvelasco at yahoo.com Tue Nov 9 20:13:29 2004 From: jiggsvelasco at yahoo.com (jp velasco) Date: Tue, 9 Nov 2004 12:13:29 -0800 (PST) Subject: Every Tom, Dick and Harry... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041109201329.46366.qmail@web52908.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 117508 SSSusan: > Interesting! And it's not just that they're common nicknames, but > that they come from that "Tom, Dick and Harry" grouping. Any ideas > on who's going to turn out to be Dick, then? :-) Finwitch: > Dick's the Half Blood Prince, I guess... now we just need to find > out his surname. One with a meaning since we have Riddle (in a way, > the prophecy is a riddle too!) and Potter (common enough, a profession > for making pottery out of clay). JP here: A thought just occured to me... correct me if I'm wrong but, isn't Dick the nickname for Richard? Which in turn is associated with the Lion...(British Royalty) which in turn is a cat... in which Jo has given in her website that clue that is associated with lions? (not to mention the Gryffindor Mascot) so I think that Dick is the Half-Blood Prince! Thoughts? Reactions? Comments anyone? From dk59us at yahoo.com Wed Nov 10 00:43:40 2004 From: dk59us at yahoo.com (Eustace_Scrubb) Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2004 00:43:40 -0000 Subject: Brain room In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117509 Kim wrote: > > Thought I'd throw out a potentially nonsensical question (from the > long list generated by recently re-reading the last chapters of OotP): > > You know that Brain Room in the Dept. of Mysteries? Whose brains did > they used to be? Do you think it matters? Eustace_Scrubb: Definitely not nonsensical! If Madame Pomfrey says the brain could have caused harm, as Maddy pointed out, I'd think it would really depend on whose brain it was. Now muggle labs and medical museums have historical preserved the brains of both geniuses and notorius criminals. Who knows who belonged to the brain that Ron summoned? Grindelwald? Dangerous Dai Llewellyn? One of the Hogwarts founders? But I bet it will be important somewhere along the line. Cheers, Eustace_Scrubb From foxmoth at qnet.com Wed Nov 10 00:47:38 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2004 00:47:38 -0000 Subject: Bad guys and black hats (was Re: Unreliable narrator) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117510 Pippin: > > I realize it's very unconventional to make a sympathetic character the villain, especially in what some of us think of as a children's book. In that sense, considering Lupin as a potential villain requires a subversive reading. But JKR has said all along that her bad guys are not conventional black hats. > > > > Renee: > Did she put it exactly like this? (Quote, please?) Because I can't help thinking that a lot of JKR's bad guys, including the chief villain, *are* fairly conventional black hats. I'd be disappointed if she really said this, and it would reinforce my opinion that authors should refrain from explaining their own texts. < http://www.quick-quote-quill.org/articles/2000/0700-cbc-solomon .htm With Voldemort, I didn't want to create this cardboard cutout of a baddie, where you put a black hat on him and you say 'Right, now you shoot at that guy because he's bad.' E: Like the Dursleys are more of a cutout bad people? JK: Yes and no. You will meet Dursleys, in Britain. You will. I've barely exaggerated them. Yeah, Voldemort. In the second book, Chamber of Secrets, in fact he's exactly what I've said before. He takes what he perceives to be a defect in himself, in other words the non-purity of his blood, and he projects it onto others. It's like Hitler and the Arian ideal, to which he did not conform at all, himself. And so Voldemort is doing this also. He takes his own inferiority, and turns it back on other people and attempts to exterminate in them what he hates in himself. Pippin From mommystery at hotmail.com Wed Nov 10 00:52:04 2004 From: mommystery at hotmail.com (mommystery2003) Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2004 00:52:04 -0000 Subject: Why has DD never suggested Snape thank Harry? (Was: Why has DD never suggested H In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117511 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "dumbledore11214" > Alla: > > > I disagree. What was proven in the first book is that Snape saved > Harry's life. Is that a good deed? Yes, definitely. Does it mean that > Snape "looks after" Harry? Not necessarily. > > It could have mean exactly what Dumbledore said that Snape was > looking forward to pay his debt and continue hating his memory in > peace. > > Snape deserves credit for that, but Eggplant was saying that Harry > deserves much more credit from Snape for saving everybody multiple > times and never getting any. Harry gets credit from everyone except Snape for what he does. Yes, Harry does deserve credit from Snape for what he has done, but regardless of the reason Snape saved Harry's life, he also deserves credit from Harry for that. Snape is at least honorable in the fact that he is paying off a wizard's debt to someone he hates. Perhaps he's doing it so he can hate James in peace - that's his decision and he has to live with it. But he is paying off that debt to someone who is only seeing the bad in him. Who knows what a little thanks from both to each other could do. Ces From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Wed Nov 10 01:21:33 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2004 01:21:33 -0000 Subject: Dirty Harry/Clean Harry (Harry's good core) In-Reply-To: <20041109042110.5912.qmail@web53105.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117512 Kelsey Dangelo wrote: "I like your point about how Riddle wants to do evil, cruel things, to be evil. I think that TR/Voldie is just evil. He likes it. He's Harry's moral polar opposite. He chooses to be evil because that's what he is. I think he enjoys it. It's his style. He enjoys being powerful and hurting people and gaining things he wants. Voldie isn't a misguided creature that thinks he's doing something good for wizardkind (that job's reserved for Fudge). He's like Iago of _Othello_. He's perfectly aware of a greater moral code; he just likes to be bad. He's evil, he likes it, he's good at it, he has no excuses. " Del replies : I almost agree with you. The point I disagree with is "He's perfectly aware of a greater moral code". In my idea, he's not. He's aware of a *different* moral code, but I don't see that he ever realised that it was better. In fact, it's rather the opposite : he regards those who believe in that moral code to be inferiors. He seems to believe that *his* moral code is better. Kelsey wrote : " Yes, that is sort of the point that I made elsewhere in that post. Why is Voldie incapable of love? I just don't understand that. I don't see how that is humanly possible. That's not the way things are in real life. But that's what JKR says, so it must be so." Del replies : It *does* happen. Those people are psychopaths, or sociopaths. They are rare, luckily, but they do exist. I've read up on them recently, because of Tom Riddle, and it's chilling to see how much Tom resembles real life sociopaths. I don't think it's just a coincidence : I believe JKR did it intentionally. This should reassure you on one point : Harry *cannot* become like LV, because he "doesn't have what it takes" to be a sociopath. He could become someone mean and cruel like Snape or Malfoy, but he could never become LV. Del From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Wed Nov 10 01:43:27 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2004 01:43:27 -0000 Subject: Bad guys and black hats (was Re: Unreliable narrator) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117513 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "pippin_999" wrote: > > http://www.quick-quote-quill.org/articles/2000/0700-cbc-solomon > .htm > > With Voldemort, I didn't want to create this cardboard cutout of a > baddie, where you put a black hat on him and you say 'Right, > now you shoot at that guy because he's bad.' Alla: Pippin, thank you for the quote. I don't know whether I would go that far as Renee suggests that authors should refrain from explaining their texts, because for me authoritarial intention is a VERY big factor, when I try to interpret the text. BUT I definitely agree with Renee in her contention that most of JKR bad guys, ESPECIALLY Voldemort, are pretty conventionally black hats (now good guys with evil side is a totally different story :o)) From ginnysthe1 at yahoo.com Wed Nov 10 01:44:23 2004 From: ginnysthe1 at yahoo.com (ginnysthe1) Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2004 01:44:23 -0000 Subject: Every Tom, Dick and Harry... In-Reply-To: <20041109201329.46366.qmail@web52908.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117514 Kim here. Hope it's OK that I included all the posts (I think), with a few snips here and there: Antosha asked: A very random and possibly pointless thought occurred to me today. Could there be any significance in the fact that the two antagonists in this series both have what would normally be considered nicknames? ... We know that Tom Riddle is really a Tom, not a Thomas or Tomas, because of his ridiculous little anagram. If he were more than just a Tom, he'd have to stick an extra 'h', 'a', and 's' into "I am Lord Voldemort." ... Harry, while somewhat more common as a given name, is also typically a nickname for Harold or Henry. Any significance? Am I just lacking sleep?< Then SSSusan: >Interesting! And it's not just that they're common nicknames, but that they come from that "Tom, Dick and Harry" grouping. Any ideas on who's going to turn out to be Dick, then? :-) < Finwitch: >Dick's the Half Blood Prince, I guess... now we just need to find out his surname. One with a meaning since we have Riddle (in a way, the prophecy is a riddle too!) and Potter (common enough, a profession for making pottery out of clay). ... So are we going to have Dick Blue, Dick Noble, Dick King - or maybe even Dick Prince? (Would make him Prince by name! and everyone's calling him by surname...)< Ginger: >Now there's a new one. Could the Prince family be an old wizarding family (perhaps DE's?) who had a wayward son who met a Muggle? Or could they be an old Muggle family, one of whom chanced to fall in love with a witch? ... Now is "Dick" Prince a new student, or a student who Harry hasn't noticed yet? (gasp! the good Slytherin) or an adult? ... So many questions. I kind of like this. It's a different take than trying to infuse royalty into the picture. Too bad all the RL royal males are too old for Hogwarts.< Catkind: >Love the theory, Finwitch. But I fear Dicks in children's fiction may have gone the same way as poor Titty in Swallows and Amazons.< Bboyminn: >Slightly OT, but Prince William was born in 1982 and Prince Harry was born in 1984. Harry on the other hand was born in 1980. Prince William - June 21, 1982 (William Arthur Philip Louis Windsor), Prince Harry - September 16, '84 (Prince Henry Charles Albert David Windsor). I've often fantasized about a meeting between the Princes of the Real world and the 'princes' (Harry & Ron) of the wizard world. In this fantasy, P. Will and P. Harry received Hogwarts letters but because of their high profile highly public lives, they were unable to attend. ... Also, let's not forget that there are other assorted Princes lurking about the UK, like Prince Andrew. In addition, the House of Windsor has direct family ties to the Royal houses of Denmark, Greece, Russia, and Germany (maybe more; Norway, Sweden, Belgium, Netherlands, Spain, Monaco?). So, theoretically, there could be, somewhere in that vast expanse of UK related European royalty, a wizard or two. Also, keep in mind that it is not just the son of a King who is a prince, but the son of a prince. Prince Will & Prince Harry are the sons of Prince Charles. One would also assume that sons of a princess are also Princes. Considering the House of Windsor's many international blood ties, that makes for a lot of potential princes to be lurking about. Then add to that all the Princes who are not related to the Windsors. Side note: The current Windsor family was previously named 'Saxe-Coburg- Gotha'. ... So, that would solve the 'Prince' aspect in an interesting way, now if I could just think of a way to tie in the Half-Blood part. Since the focus is on the /prince/ we would logically assume that he is the magical person in the family. So, to be half-blood, I suppose he could either be half-royal/half-commoner, or half magic/half muggle. ... Now all we have to do is decide if he is a literal prince or a metaphorical prince. Although, I have argued in the past for a metaphorical prince, I think it would be interesting if JKR could tie the actual royal family of some European country to the wizard world.< JP: >A thought just occured to me... correct me if I'm wrong but, isn't Dick the nickname for Richard? Which in turn is associated with the Lion...(British Royalty) which in turn is a cat... in which Jo has given in her website that clue that is associated with lions? (not to mention the Gryffindor Mascot) so I think that Dick is the Half-Blood Prince! Thoughts? Reactions? Comments anyone?< Kim now: So many good points in all the posts! Dick is definitely a nickname for Richard. And the other connection you (JP) made to the Gryffindor Lion is interesting. The name Prince could be a play on words, like Richard Prince is a prince of a Prince (and maybe he's also an actual prince?) With a name like Prince, he's bound to be a good guy (though of course there have been evil princes in literature too). To Finwitch, who wrote "...now we just need to find out [Dick's] surname. One with a meaning since we have Riddle (in a way, the prophecy is a riddle too!) and Potter (common enough, a profession for making pottery out of clay)." I (Kim) had been wondering lately if there wasn't even more symbolic meaning to Harry's last name Potter? Like "one who creates something (i.e. a pot, maybe a useful or beautiful pot?) out of nothing (i.e. clay; clay is not exactly nothing, of course, but it is rather formless). Not knowing much anthropology, I would still imagine that potters have held a respected position in various tribes over the centuries. And making something out of nothing sort of reminds me in a way of Fawkes the Phoenix (or any Phoenix, for that matter) who re-makes *himself* out of ashes. Just a thought that might shed more light on who Harry might really be. (And IIRC, I think Finwitch suggested at one point that Harry could turn out to be a Phoenix himself?) Outside of JKR bringing in a connection to real living royals, I wonder what kind of royalty of its own the WW might have. Were the four Hogwarts founders from some royal wizarding lineage? Slytherin was definitely a racist and a snob, but was he also royal? (not that I'm suggesting the real royals are racists and snobs) What about the other three founders? So far in the HP books, I don't think there's been a reference to any royalty either in the WW past or present, but I may be mistaken. But it makes total sense for there to have been royal wizards once upon a time at least. Kim, who wonders if reading the books for the third time will actually make her remember the details any better From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Wed Nov 10 01:57:42 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2004 01:57:42 -0000 Subject: Dursleys abuse In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117515 > Renee: snip. > Quite possibly - gasp - Petunia actually loves Vernon, or at least > did so when Harry entered their household. Vernon hates the boy, and > she's simply not prepared to turn against him on Harry's behalf. I > never get the impression she's the dominant partner; does she put > her foot down more than once? > Alla: Well, that one time when Petunia actually did put her foot down and insisted that Harry would stay, she did it pretty effectively, didn't she? I don't think that untill that moment we actually had the opportunity to see who is dominant partner in Dursleys's household. Right now I am almost convinced that Petunia is. I had another thought. I don't share the thought that Dumbledore promised Petunia some punishment or torture when he asked her to take Harry in. I still have some faith in him. I believe that he promised her something that she really wanted. I don't know - if she had some sparkle of magic in her - maybe to bind her magic or Dudley's ,something to that effect. To make a long story short - I believe that he promised her something positive, not negative and Petunia made a decision to take Harry in, really wanting "it" From garybec101 at comcast.net Wed Nov 10 02:35:00 2004 From: garybec101 at comcast.net (garybec) Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2004 02:35:00 -0000 Subject: Is Harry feeling guilty for being alive ? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117516 Del wrote: Maybe Harry feels guilty for living, because he feels he killed his parents who loved him, in order to live. That would be the kind of reaction I would expect from an abused kid, who learns some difficult things at a critical age. Harry grew up being told that he was worthless, and then at age 11 he discovers that his parents died in a fight which he survived. It wouldn't seem abnormal to me that he would cristalise all the guilt the Dursleys put on him on this particular event : "I am unworthy because I killed my parents". It's the kind of twisted conclusions kids often come to. Becki responds: (some snipping involved here) I agree with you Del, I think your dead on. There is a mental disorder that some people get, survivors syndrome or something like that. Usually, survivors of a car crash, or other catastrophe where there were deaths, and the surviving person feels guilty that he/she survived and not the others. Del cont. It would explain why he doesn't want to learn about his family (not just his parents by the way, but also his grandparents and all his extended family, and even his parents' friends) : because he doesn't want to remember that his parents died "because of him". It would explain why he doesn't try to learn more about himself : because he's afraid of what he might find (things that would somehow confirm that he killed his parents). It would explain where a part of his heroism comes from : because he feels like every other life is more important than his, since he shouldn't be alive anyway. In his mind, that would be a way of trying to somehow atone for the sin of killing his parents.> Becki; Also, to alleviate some of his survivors guilt, to make up for the deaths he feels responsible for, (parents, Cedric, Sirius). Also it drives him to do the "saving people thingy", perhaps because he may feel that if that person died, that would be another one he would have to shoulder. Del; The next question would be : why did JKR make him feel guilty to start with ? There could be many reasons, but I can think of 2 main ones. 1. So that he doesn't ask questions she doesn't want answered yet. 2. So that he starts saving people. Becki; I think both answers apply, but most importantly, it has to be 2. Harry is the savior. From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Wed Nov 10 02:56:08 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2004 02:56:08 -0000 Subject: Is Harry feeling guilty for being alive ? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117517 > Del; > The next question would be : why did JKR make him feel guilty to > start with ? There could be many reasons, but I can think of 2 main > ones. > > 1. So that he doesn't ask questions she doesn't want answered yet. > > 2. So that he starts saving people. > > Becki; > I think both answers apply, but most importantly, it has to be 2. > Harry is the savior. Alla: Subconscious survivor guilt? Quite possibly. I always thought that guilt (for the most part imaginary one) is a very large part of who Harry's character is. The question I have again is when did it start and how subconscious is it? Harry does not remember how his parents died (unless you want to argue of course that he really remembers more than green flash and flying motorbikes). Dursleys, no matter how horrible they are, never blame Harry for his parents death. How would he know? Sure, this guilt may develop when he learns the truth, but it also does not happen right away and by that time, he already has more positive reasons to fight - to protect people he loves. So, in short my position is that guilt is there, just not developed from the early childhood. I think that his guilt over Cedric's and Sirius' deaths is MUCH stronger that any guilt over his parents death. From dontask2much at yahoo.com Wed Nov 10 02:56:59 2004 From: dontask2much at yahoo.com (charme) Date: Tue, 9 Nov 2004 21:56:59 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Department of Mysteries Locked Room References: Message-ID: <013d01c4c6d0$f3437c80$6601a8c0@MITRE.ORG> No: HPFGUIDX 117518 From: "snow15145" >> > Glavgirl: >> >> The door has always left me perplexed. Many people (myself > included) >> have surmised from Dumbledore's speech at the end of the book that >> the "power" in that room is love, or compassion, or some other >> similar thing. This makes some sense, but it seems incomplete or >> somehow only partially realized to me. >> >> -Nepenthales >> The question that comes to my mind when I read the passages about > the >> door isn't about what is beyond it. I'm more interested in knowing >> *why is the door locked*. > Snow: > > Could it be that the door is locked out of protection? Is this > symbolized by the way Harry (the one who has so much of the power > within this room) is locked away from the wizarding world in a closet > under the stairs in a muggle home protected by his mother's sacrifice > and compounded with Dumbledore's added protection? charme, now: I had a deja vu moment when I read these posts about the DoM Locked Room. Specifically, my otherwise memory repeat is attributed to all the great quotes about truth, which is what I believe is locked away (or hidden, if you will) in that room. DD's reference in OoP to the locked room containing something "more wonderful and terrible than death...than human intelligence, than forces of nature" could lead me to believe it's love, but I think truth is interlinked with love. I also think that door will open in Book 7, when the final twists and turns of the septology is revealed. Hence why the door is locked. Poets are all who love, who feel great truths, And tell them; and the truth of truths is love (Phillip James Bailey) Truth is truth. To the end of reckoning. (Shakespeare, who has sooo many references to truth in his plays that one wonders how any truth can be kept hidden) Great is truth, and mighty above all things (Bible - New Testament) We know the truth, not only by the reason, but also by the heart. (Blaise Pascal) And those are just a sample of the many, many quotations about "truth." Notice as well, truth is also linked with love and justice. Of course, everyone's free to think I've lost my mind....(I probably have) :) charme From jlnbtr at yahoo.com Wed Nov 10 00:22:45 2004 From: jlnbtr at yahoo.com (Juli) Date: Tue, 9 Nov 2004 16:22:45 -0800 (PST) Subject: The Riddles' Murders (WAS: The only one he ever feared? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041110002245.25064.qmail@web53106.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 117519 > JP replied: > > I think that the Office focuses on underage magic, > > use of Muggle artifacts to play practical jokes or > > to harm Muggles and such. > > Kim now: > But then the deaths of three Riddles from Avada > Kedavras would surely have been considered "harm to > Muggles," as you say. > > In any case, AK (Avada Kedavra) is also an > Unforgiveable Curse and it wouldn't matter if the > wizard who performed it was "of age" -- performing > AK, Crucio, or Imperius curses is supposed to land > you in Azkaban. I completely agree with JP, Harry received 2 letters from Mafalda Hopkirk because he did underage magic. I don't think her department tracks all magic, even unforgivable curses, they just track underage magic. They would have learned that Arthur uses magic on his Ford Anglia, they never knew it could fly until Ron & Harry used it to get from King's cross to Hogwarts, so this propably means the only magic the MoM tracks in underage magic. By the way, wizards come of age at 17, so if LV was 17 when he killed his dad and grandparents, nobody would have noticed, unless like DD they read the muggle's newspaper and the autopsy report (nothing wrong except the fact they were dead) which I doubt. Juli From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Wed Nov 10 03:51:32 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2004 03:51:32 -0000 Subject: Goodness - Free Will - Harry (Harry's good core) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117520 Siriusly Snapey Susan wrote: > Sometimes when a person does X, he ends up feeling good [as in, > rewarded, "right," warm & fuzzy inside], and this can be a positive > reinforcement for the behavior in question. Intrinsic reward, you > know? I maintain that for many people is simply feels good to do > good. Harry may have found that sharing with Ron, for instance, made him feel good about himself. And he liked feeling good about > himself, particularly after years of being told that he's worthless. > This kind of positive experience might well motivate future action. > Carol responds: As I read this thread (and I admit I'm still catching up here and may have missed something), the question is why Harry shared with Ron in the first place. I agree that feeling good about sharing was a kind of reward ("positive reinforcement") that would lead him to want to do the same thing again, but I don't think he could have anticipated that feeling. And I don't think he did it out of innate goodness, either; we've seen Harry act vindictively even toward his friends. (I'll cite examples if anyone challenges me here but I'm trying to be succinct.) We know that Harry saw very little sharing at the Dursleys (who constantly gave the ungrateful Dudley whatever he wanted but received nothing in return, certainly not respect or affection), and he had no friends of his own at school, but I would be quite surprised if he hadn't witnessed friends sharing with each other at school and receiving mutual pleasure. If so, he may have unconsciously stored up such memories as reflecting something that he wanted for himself. On the train with Ron, he suddenly had an opportunity to experience that pleasure. He wouldn't need to feel good *about himself* to want to repeat the experience: Sharing something good, whether it's a bag of popcorn or a favorite book that you read together, is often more pleasurable than eating or reading the "something good" alone. Harry may well have anticipated that kind of shared pleasure based on previous observation of other children. And the experience was everything he thought it would be. Carol From frugalarugala at yahoo.com Wed Nov 10 04:39:38 2004 From: frugalarugala at yahoo.com (frugalarugala) Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2004 04:39:38 -0000 Subject: Every Tom, Dick and Harry... In-Reply-To: <20041109201329.46366.qmail@web52908.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117521 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, jp velasco wrote: > > SSSusan: > > Interesting! And it's not just that they're common nicknames, but > > that they come from that "Tom, Dick and Harry" grouping. Any ideas > > on who's going to turn out to be Dick, then? :-) > > Finwitch: > > Dick's the Half Blood Prince, I guess... now we just need to find > > out his surname. One with a meaning since we have Riddle (in a way, > > the prophecy is a riddle too!) and Potter (common enough, a profession > > for making pottery out of clay). > > > JP here: > > A thought just occured to me... correct me if I'm wrong but, isn't Dick the nickname for Richard? Which in turn is associated with the Lion...(British Royalty) which in turn is a cat... in which Jo has given in her website that clue that is associated with lions? (not to mention the Gryffindor Mascot) so > I think that Dick is the Half-Blood Prince! > > Thoughts? Reactions? Comments anyone? Higgs is an old nickname for Richard... From kethryn at wulfkub.com Wed Nov 10 05:05:21 2004 From: kethryn at wulfkub.com (Kethryn) Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2004 00:05:21 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Every Tom, Dick and Harry... References: Message-ID: <002f01c4c6e2$e3c0fa00$0402a8c0@carolina.rr.com> No: HPFGUIDX 117522 > JP: > >A thought just occured to me... correct me if I'm wrong but, isn't > Dick the nickname for Richard? Which in turn is associated with the > Lion...(British Royalty) which in turn is a cat... in which Jo has > given in her website that clue that is associated with lions? (not to > mention the Gryffindor Mascot) so I think that Dick is the Half-Blood > Prince! Thoughts? Reactions? Comments anyone?< Kethryn now Ahha, I got it! His name will be Richard LionHart? That gives the royal aspect as well as the correct name for the Tom, Dick and Harry. Either that or his last name will be Nixon or even Kennedy (American royals) *G* Kethryn who is sorry for the short post but thought that was too funny not to share. From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Wed Nov 10 05:10:18 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2004 05:10:18 -0000 Subject: The Riddles' Murders (WAS: The only one he ever feared? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117523 Katrina wrote: > > > > > > > What LV fears about DD is what he knows. I've heard it > > > postulated that when TR dropped "off the radar screen" after he > > > finished at Hogwarts, it was because of the triple AK murder in Debbie wrote: > > > > I don't believe that Tom Riddle disappeared *because* he was fleeing the scene of his parents' murders. Rather, he decided to leave to seek out what Dumbledore calls "the very worst of our kind" who could instruct him in the Dark Arts, but before he left he stopped off in Little Hangleton for the revenge murder of his parents. > > ...edited... > > bboyminn responded: > > Unless I read it wrong, I think Tom murdered his parents in the summer between his 6th and 7th year at Hogwarts. Since he came back to > school, it doesn't seem like anyone made any connnection to Tom and > the death of the Riddles. > > Once he graduated, he sought out the Dark Arts as a source of power > that other, weaker, people were unwilling to tap. I think Tom was in the process of transforming himself into Voldemort, the self-proclaimed most power wizard in the world, champion of the pureblood cause, and the next supreme evil overlord of > the universe. A wizard so powerful and ruthless that all would fear to speak his name. > > I often wondered if Tom collected the inheritance on his parents > estate, and used that money to finance his transformation? > Carol responds: You're right that the murder was committed about a year before he left to seek out Dark wizards though my impression is that he was pursuing immortality through transformations rather than seeking power or championing the pureblood cause. The Muggles didn't know about him (only Frank Bryce saw him leaving the scene of the crime and no one believed him). I very much doubt that he collected his inheritance or he would immediately have aroused his suspicions: he benefited from the crime, so he would automatically be a suspect, and he fit the description of the mysterious teenage boy. Dumbledore says that he knew about the crime because he reads the Muggle newspapers, but no one else in the WW was apparently aware of it. Why Dumbledore didn't report his suspicions to the authorities, I don't know. Certainly a Prioir Incantatem on Tom's wand would have shown three AKs and proved him guilty. Possibly DD thought the MoM would concern itself with the deaths of three Muggles. Also I don't think that area was monitored; Tom's mother, the only witch we know of in the area, was long dead, and Tom himself had lived in an orphanage, quite possibly in London and certainly not in Little Hangleton because no one there knew of his existence (his father had evidently placed him somewhere out of sight, out of mind). From what we've seen, the MoM mostly monitors underage wizards in Muggle areas and even that practice seems to be recent; Lily Potter was evidently able to transfigure rats into teacups without getting into trouble, and Tom's youth was long before hers. I agree with Steve that the security around Privet Drive is particularly acute; nothing of the sort would have been needed in Little Hangleton in 1944 or thereabouts. Also the MoM's security, when it *is* in place, can apparently determine what kind of spell was performed (e.g., a hover charm at 4 Privet Drive in CoS). Surely if Little Hangleton were under the MoM's radar, they would have detected three Avada Kedavras, and since the dead Muggles were Tom Riddle's parents, he would have been the immediate and only suspect? I think he committed the murders, suspected by nobody (except Frank Bryce and Dumbledore), returned to school, and left on his quest for Transformation without a knut to his name, quite possibly leaving everything but his wand and the clothes on his back to one of the friends who already called him Lord Voldemort, the future father of Lucius Malfoy, who had in his keeping Tom's school diary and perhaps a few other artifacts that he passed down to his son. Carol, challenging anyone to come up with a longer sentence than her last one From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Wed Nov 10 06:22:19 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2004 06:22:19 -0000 Subject: Is Harry feeling guilty for being alive ? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117524 Alla wrote: > > > Subconscious survivor guilt? Quite possibly. I always thought that > guilt (for the most part imaginary one) is a very large part of who > Harry's character is. The question I have again is when did it start > and how subconscious is it? > > Harry does not remember how his parents died (unless you want to > argue of course that he really remembers more than green flash and > flying motorbikes). Dursleys, no matter how horrible they are, never > blame Harry for his parents death. How would he know? > > So, in short my position is that guilt is there, just not developed > from the early childhood. I think that his guilt over Cedric's and > Sirius' deaths is MUCH stronger that any guilt over his parents > death. Carol responds: I think that Del (who suggested the survivor's guilt idea) is on the right track regarding Harry's reluctance to talk about his family. Survivor's guilt doesn't require the other person's death to be the survivor's fault. All it requires is his surviving the event that killed the other person. So even as a child who thought that his parents died in a car crash, he could have subconsciously felt guilty for living when his parents died, a guilt that would have been reinforced by all the hero worship of the Boy Who Lived. (Imagine how Harry felt when he found out that people were *celebrating* his triumph over Voldemort when he didn't even do anything except get zapped in the head by a killing curse that somehow bounced off him, celebrating when his parents had just been murdered. Also--and please don't think I'm cold and unfeeling--I don't think his parents are *real* to him. He never knew them; they're just names. Yes, he stared at them longingly in the Mirror of Erised, but what he wanted was a loving family, a sense of belonging, and now he has that both with the Weasleys and at Hogwarts. I found his reaction to Rita Skeeter's question about his parents (GoF, "Weighing of the Wands") strangely disturbing: " (Am. ed. 306) Harry was reeling really annoyed now. How on earth was he to know how his parents would feel if they were alive?" Those two sentences caused me to realize that Harry's parents are strangers to him. He never knew them; he seems not to want to know them. Survivor's guilt would be a reasonable explanation. I agree with you that his guilt over Cedric's death is stronger and almost fully conscious, though it appears in his dreams as well. That guilt, combined with all his other concerns (and just possibly Voldemort manipulating his emotions) seems more than sufficient to me as a reason why he doesn't ask Black or Lupin about his parents and is so upset when Moody shows him the photo of the Order. The glimpse in the Pensieve stirs his curiosity briefly and he does talk to Black and Lupin about it, but both of them seem to be trying to cover for James, to make him better than he really was. It's not surprising that he puts both his parents out of his mind after that. Maybe the death of Sirius Black will help Harry to form a stronger bond with Remus Lupin, but it will take time for Harry to recover from Black's death. His survivor's guilt will be stronger than ever because this time some of the responsibility really is his. Carol From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Wed Nov 10 06:47:32 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2004 06:47:32 -0000 Subject: When were the Longbottoms attacked? (was Re: Did the Potters know the prophecy?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117525 Juli wrote: I don't think Barty Jr was with the Lestranges when he was caught, he could have been with any other DE but he was convicted with the Lestranges. > > Ginger responded: I had assumed that he had been caught with the Lestranges. > It read that way to me at the trial. On page 603 (GoF, US paperback) Harry asks Dumbledore if Barty was involved, to which DD replies that he doesn't know. Interestingly, Barty doesn't confess to it under Veritaserum. But then, DD never asked. > > In all, I think that there was more than just a little time between > LV vapourizing and the Longbottoms' torture. I also believe Barty > was guilty based on what little evidence we have. Carol adds: I agree with Ginger that Barty Jr. was caught with the Lestranges. Most of the other DEs had already been arrested (or had gotten off on a plea of being Imperio'd) when they were brought in. I realize that Sirius Black says in GoF that Barty was found with people "I'd bet my life were Death Eaters," but JKR can't have him saying, "found with my hated cousin Bellatrix, her husband Rodolphus, and his brother Rabastan, all of whom were Death Eaters." It would be awkward and would take up unnecessary space in the dialogue, which has to focus on the Tri-Wizard Tournament and the dangers Harry is facing at the moment. It's more convenient to bring in the names, and the relationship between Bellatrix and Sirius, at other points in the story (the Pensieve chapter of GoF and the "Most Noble and Ancient House of Black" chapter in OoP). I also agree that Barty was as guilty as the Lestranges were. (Somewhere in an earlier post I argue that he had to have learned how to cast a morsmordre and the Unforgiveable Curses before he went to Azkaban. There's no way he could have done that--or developed his fanatical loyalty to Voldemort--in Azkaban or under his fahter's Imperius Curse.) I'm not sure about the time element, but I've always thought the attack on the Longbottoms was at least a month after Godric's Hollow--enough time for most of the DEs to have been captured and for people to feel that life had gone back to normal. Carol From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Wed Nov 10 07:26:50 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2004 07:26:50 -0000 Subject: Timing of the prophecy In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117526 Hickengruendler wrote: > > I don't think we should take Trelawney's statement to literally. Seh > said she worked in Hogwarts for nearly sixteen years in the scene you > mentioned, and then again she said that she's in Hogwarts for sixteen > years, in the scene where she's sacked. All that it means is IMO that > she was hired between October 1979th and April or May 1980. Not a > very specific date, but I don't think we can come any closer in our > guesses. > > It's the same about Snape. He said in September/October that he > worked in Hogwarts for fourteen years. If we took it literally, he > was hired nefore Voldie's downfall. But it's way more likely that he > was speaking losely and was hired in November, after Harry defeated > Voldemort. That would still count as 14 years, even if not exactly. Carol notes: I agree that the date for Trelawney is imprecise, but "nearly sixteen years" suggests the winter of 1979-80 rather than a later date, which would be more like fifteen and a half years. Snape, however, normally speaks precisely. I think he would say "almost fourteen years" rather than "fourteen years" if he were hired in early November (after Godric's Hollow). It's quite possible, and IMO probable, that he was hired in late August to begin teaching on September 1, the beginning of term. (I think he was already teaching at Hogwarts when the Potters were killed and that it was some change in his Dark Mark that alerted Dumbledore to their deaths, but of course that's speculation.) At any rate, there is no evidence to indicate that "fourteen years" is anything other than a straightforward statement of fact, and only the assumption that he must have been hired after Godric's Hollow causes some readers to take it as an approximation. Carol From bboyminn at yahoo.com Wed Nov 10 07:50:12 2004 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2004 07:50:12 -0000 Subject: New!TOM - Fight or Rebuild? You be the Judge. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117527 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "delwynmarch" wrote: > > I, Del, wrote earlier : > " CoS : even if Diary!Tom had managed to get himself a real body, I > really don't think he would have been any real adversary to DD...." > Alla answered : > "We don't know that. He dealt with Ginny pretty easily and who knows > what wonderful things he could have started doing if he got a body." > Del replies : > Ginny was a first-year ! No comparison with any teacher in school > (well, any *real* teacher, not Lockhart or Trelawney). > > As for the wonderful things : he would still have been a 16-year-old > Tom Riddle. Pretty powerful and advanced *for his age*, but no match > for DD or the Aurors. bboyminn: You make is sound as if the very first thing New!Tom would have done was go looking for a fight; go looking for Dumbledore, or one of the teachers. Personally, that sounds extremely unlikely. The first thing he would have done is left that castle as soon as possible. The second thing would have been to re-unite with his old self. The combination of Old!Voldemort and New!Tom would have been a substantial adversary. You would be combining the exprience of a 70 year old, well versed in the Dark Arts, with the youthful body and idealistic mind of 16 year old Tom. Assuming they could actually merge themselves into one corporeal person, I think the new combined Voldie!Tom would have been more powerful and dangerous than either of them separately, and I think that is what JKR was referring to when she made the comment about this eventuality hypothetically occuring. > ...edited... > > Alla wrote : > "In my book it does count as saving the WW from Voldemort." > Del replies : > Not in mine. Harry saved Ginny, agreed. He may also have saved the > world a bit of trouble, but honestly : 16-year-old Tom was NOT a > threat to the WW at large. He might have killed a few other people > ..., granted, but he would eventually have been stopped by DD or the > Aurors or whoever. > > Del bboyminn: I think you are grossly underestimating Tom Riddle. Once he had his body back, I'm sure he would have sought out his old supporters; especially, and most likely, Lucius Malfoy. We can speculate that since it seems to be L.Malfoy who put this whole plan into motion, that he and Diary!Tom had cooked up the scheme together, both to discredit Mr.Weasley, to deal with Harry, and to regain a physical form that Voldemort could use. In addition, once Tom Riddle had a body, even if he ignored the existing Vapormort, there was nothing to stop him from taking 5 or 10 years to learn from his mistakes, to gather data on his previous transformations, to rebuild his army, and to rebuild himself bigger and better than he was before. I really just don't see new!Tom strutting around the wizard world challenging everyone and anyone to a duel. Having regained his body, he would have focused on rebuilding himself and his cause. Sorry, but that's how I see it. Steve/bboyminn (was bboy_mn) From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Wed Nov 10 08:06:22 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2004 08:06:22 -0000 Subject: The dragon memory (Was: Dursleys abuse) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117528 Pippin wrote: > > > We've heard about a few upsetting incidents, but we also know, > from the occlumency lessons, that Harry has forgotten quite a bit > about his childhood, including, apparently, an incident with a > dragon. Carol responds: I think I know the memory you're referring to--it's in the same clump of memories as Cedric's death. I saw it as referring to his recent encounter with a dragon in the TWT. Any reason why you see it differently? (I also saw no reason to think that he had "forgotten" any of the memories that were revealed in the Occlumency lessons. None of them occurred before he was about five years old and most related to the Dursleys.) Can you explain your thinking for me? Thanks, Carol From R.Vink2 at chello.nl Wed Nov 10 08:27:56 2004 From: R.Vink2 at chello.nl (Renee) Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2004 08:27:56 -0000 Subject: Bad guys and black hats (was Re: Unreliable narrator) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117529 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "pippin_999" wrote: > > Pippin: > But JKR has said all along > that her bad guys are not conventional black hats. > > > > > > > Renee: > > Did she put it exactly like this? (Quote, please?) > http://www.quick-quote-quill.org/articles/2000/0700-cbc-solomon > .htm > > With Voldemort, I didn't want to create this cardboard cutout of a > baddie, where you put a black hat on him and you say 'Right, > now you shoot at that guy because he's bad.' > > E: Like the Dursleys are more of a cutout bad people? > > JK: Yes and no. You will meet Dursleys, in Britain. You will. I've > barely exaggerated them. Yeah, Voldemort. In the second book, > Chamber of Secrets, in fact he's exactly what I've said before. He > takes what he perceives to be a defect in himself, in other words > the non-purity of his blood, and he projects it onto others. It's > like Hitler and the Arian ideal, to which he did not conform at all, > himself. And so Voldemort is doing this also. He takes his own > inferiority, and turns it back on other people and attempts to > exterminate in them what he hates in himself. > > Pippin Renee: Thank you. I supposed that means I *am* disappointed, because as far as I'm concerned JKR hasn't succeeded in making Voldemort more than a cardboard villain, so far. Everyone has a motive, and lack of self- acceptance and inferiority feelings strike me as pretty conventional explanations for going bad, I'd say. Renee From R.Vink2 at chello.nl Wed Nov 10 08:53:19 2004 From: R.Vink2 at chello.nl (Renee) Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2004 08:53:19 -0000 Subject: Bad guys and black hats (was Re: Unreliable narrator) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117530 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "dumbledore11214" wrote: > > > > Alla: > I don't know whether I would go > that far as Renee suggests that authors should refrain from > explaining their texts, because for me authoritarial intention is > a VERY big factor, when I try to interpret the text. Renee: Then this is where we must agree to disagree. IMO a (contemporary) literary text should basically speak for itself - barring explanations to readers from a different cultural environment, perhaps. If authors need to explain what they're trying to convey, there's something not quite right. It's a form of telling, instead of showing. Renee From SongBird3411 at aol.com Wed Nov 10 07:46:25 2004 From: SongBird3411 at aol.com (SongBird3411 at aol.com) Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2004 07:46:25 -0000 Subject: Occlumency: Relax or resist? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117531 Hello! I am delurking for a bit, though it feels rather strange. I have been catching up on a few weeks of posts, so I apologize for bringing up an older post. But, as it is just from last weekend, I felt it wasn't too old. The reason I love reading this list is because frequently members post ideas or perspectives I hadn't considered before. Usually, I just think, "Wow, that is interesting", then move on. However, I have some free time tonight, so I thought I would respond. Sorry that it is a bit of a "me too" post. > Carol wrote: > I think we know a great deal about how Occlumency works, and we can > see when and why Harry fails or gets it right. Before the first > lesson, Snape tells him what he needs to do--*not* relax but to > *resist*--to protect his mind from intrusion as he did with the > Imperius Curse (534). Now me, Mindy: I wanted to thank Carol for bringing up this idea. For around a year now, I have heard people say that Harry needed to relax to learn Occlumency and it always bothered me. I too got the impression that Snape was telling Harry to focus on resisting. As he did with the Imperius Curse. Harry had to clear his mind to deflect that curse too. Clear it in order to focus on deflecting, really. That does seem remarkably similar to what he was supposed to do with Occlumency. Stop letting emotion get in the way and focus on resisting. I thought Carol did quite a nice job in using canon quotes to support this idea. Of course, Snape is one of my favorite characters, so I admit to some bias. However, I am fully willing to admit that Snape is sometimes quite a nasty and bitter man. Those Occlumency lessons were not examples those times, IMO. Recently here I read a post from someone claiming Snape was torturing Harry in those lessons. (Sorry don't remember specific post number.) I believe this is a common idea. However, after some thought, I think that in many ways Snape's Occlumency lessons were little different than Lupin's Patronus lessons. Gasp! Yes, I did just say that. Here are some common complaints: "Snape didn't tell Harry how he was supposed to stop the Legilimency." Well, I am not so sure Lupid did that bang up of a job at first either. He has Harry practice without even a Boggart to start with. Harry says the incantation a few times and produces something that "looked like a wisp of silver gas" (POA, Scholastic Hardcover pg 238). From what we now know of the Patronus Charm, that certainly doesn't seem like Harry has mastered the defense. Yet, Lupin then opened the case and let the Boggart out. When Harry inevitably fails, Lupin says he didn't expect Harry to do it the first time anyway. Snape told Harry that the defense was similar to how he resisted the Imperius Curse. Probably not the most helpful information. Yet, is it really all that *less* helpful than Lupin's preparation? Especially with Snape's follow-ups to focus, clear his mind, and control his emotions, etc. "Snape subjected Harry to pain". In Harry's first Patronus lesson he is subjected to the memories of the murder of his parents three times. He collapses twice. Is in tears at least once. The only difference I see here is that Harry asked to continue with the Patronus lessons, while Snape didn't give Harry the option of quitting. Surely, the memories of the murder of his parents count as being traumatic just as much as the memories of the awful treatment he received at the Dursleys as well as the other memories he experienced in Occlumency lessons? I guess I could go on, but I think I made my point. I just don't see how Harry was any better prepared to start learning the Patronus Charm than he was to learn Occlumency. Doesn't sound like facing the Boggart was any less traumatic than facing Legilimens Snape. I mean, unlike Neville, Harry's biggest fear is the Dementor, not Snape. So, wouldn't facing the Dementor be even worse than facing Snape? Seems to me like the only difference was that Harry didn't *want* to learn Occlumency. In fact, part of Harry didn't want to learn the Patronus Charm either. Several sessions into the lessons, Harry can only produce an "indistinct, silvery shadow" and he felt "guilty about his secret desire to hear his parents' voices again" (POA, 245- 246). So, his partial desire to keep hearing the voices was interfering with his learning how to properly cast the charm. Similarly, his desire to keep seeing the visions of Voldemort's doings prevented him from properly learning how to perform Occlumency. Granted, another difference between the lessons is Harry's differing feelings towards Snape and Lupin as people. And Snape's and Lupin's feelings towards Harry. I guess what I am saying is that I can't quite credit the idea that Snape was torturing Harry in those lessons, when the technique was essentially the same as Lupin's. The effects of the first lessons were seemingly equally debilitating. Yet, I doubt anyone would claim Lupin was torturing Harry. (Well, except maybe Pippin. Has Pippin put forward anything along those lines? Can't remember, sorry.) We saw Lupin teach the Patronus Charm by having Harry confront the Boggart/Dementor. We saw Snape attempt to teach Harry Occlumency by confronting him with Legilimency. BTW, we also saw Crouch!Moody teach Harry how to resist the Imperius Curse by confronting him with Imperio. There didn't seem to be any outrage or shock from the faculty after that. Perhaps this is common teaching practice in attempting to teach difficult magic or skills. Or rather, magic or skills that work better when the student is directly threatened. The trick is to put the threat into a controlled environment. My first 2 knuts on the list. Mindy- who also wants to thank Carol for later presenting the idea that Harry wasn't allowed to remove memories in the Occlumency lessons because Dumbledore, via Snape, wanted to find out what kinds of visions Voldemort might be implanting in Harry's mind. Fun idea! From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Wed Nov 10 11:58:13 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2004 11:58:13 -0000 Subject: New!TOM - Fight or Rebuild? You be the Judge. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117532 Steve/bboyminn wrote: " The first thing he would have done is left that castle as soon as possible. The second thing would have been to re-unite with his old self. The combination of Old!Voldemort and New!Tom would have been a substantial adversary. You would be combining the exprience of a 70 year old, well versed in the Dark Arts, with the youthful body and idealistic mind of 16 year old Tom. Assuming they could actually merge themselves into one corporeal person, I think the new combined Voldie!Tom would have been more powerful and dangerous than either of them separately, and I think that is what JKR was referring to when she made the comment about this eventuality hypothetically occuring." Del replies : That could very well be, indeed. But it's only an hypothesis, and it relies on quite a few assumptions (that Tom would go and look for LV, that he would find him, that they could be reunited). It's not a fact, it's not even a certainty, and that's why I say that I don't count Harry killing Diary!Tom as saving the world : because it's not sure. It *is* sure that Harry saved Ginny, but it is not sure that he saved the world. bboyminn wrote : "We can speculate that since it seems to be L.Malfoy who put this whole plan into motion, that he and Diary!Tom had cooked up the scheme together, both to discredit Mr.Weasley, to deal with Harry, and to regain a physical form that Voldemort could use. " Del replies : That's indeed a very possible explanation of why Lucius gave the Diary to Ginny to start with. However, Tom being Tom, I'm not sure he would have carried on with the entire plan. bboyminn wrote : "In addition, once Tom Riddle had a body, even if he ignored the existing Vapormort, there was nothing to stop him from taking 5 or 10 years to learn from his mistakes, to gather data on his previous transformations, to rebuild his army, and to rebuild himself bigger and better than he was before." Del replies : Mabye I underestimate Tom but you seem to overestimate him ;-P Judging from what we know of LV, such an intelligent approach isn't very likely. We've seen LV make many strategic mistakes over the years. His last one was a biggie : after cleverly spending a whole year pretending he doesn't exist, he blew it up *for no reason* by showing up at the MoM ! He seems to have problems learning from his mistakes. He gets vaporised after attacking Harry, and yet the very next time he comes face to face with him, he attacks him again ! With catastrophical results. And even when Quirrell wanted to stop because touching Harry burned him, LV kept pushing him on ! He's not good at gathering data : it took him several months to figure out that only those concerned with a Prophecy can pick it up. That's Prophecy 101. A little Legilimency in the mind of any Unspeakable would have taught him that. Moreover, we have to remember who and what Tom Riddle is *fundamentally*. Tom is completely self-centered, he's supremely arrogant in that he thinks he's better than anyone else, he relies only on himself, he cannot envision beforehand that he might be wrong. As such, I just don't see him managing to improve on what LV Mk.1 did. Especially not in 5 or 10 years, when it took decades to the original Tom to turn into LV. Del From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Wed Nov 10 12:19:14 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2004 12:19:14 -0000 Subject: Is Harry feeling guilty for being alive ? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117533 Alla wrote : "Subconscious survivor guilt? Quite possibly. I always thought that guilt (for the most part imaginary one) is a very large part of who Harry's character is. The question I have again is when did it start and how subconscious is it?" Del replies : The second answer is the easiest : in my idea, it's *completely* unconscious. For now. The first answer is on the same track as Carol's. Harry might have already had a vague survivor's guilt as a child, thinking that he survived a car crash that killed his parents. But IMO this vague guilt became suddenly much sharper when Harry learned the truth : that his parents had been murdered, but he survived. Surviving an accident is pure lack. Surviving a murder is much more suspicious. Moreover, kids have a special reflex of often thinking that whatever bad happens to their parents is their fault. So learning that his parents were killed but he survived might have driven Harry straight to the conclusion : they died because of me. Why or how don't matter to kids in those times : they just know it's their fault somehow. Alla wrote : "Sure, this guilt may develop when he learns the truth, but it also does not happen right away and by that time, he already has more positive reasons to fight - to protect people he loves." Del replies : *Everyone* wants to protect the people they love. But how many 11-year-old kids go and fight grown powerful wizards to prevent them from obtaining some magical object ? Answer : 1. Plus the 2 that he led into it (they were happy to follow, but I doubt they'd have done it on their own). Harry's reaction in going after Snape/Quirrellmort was NOT the normal reaction of an 11-year-old boy. Alla wrote : " So, in short my position is that guilt is there, just not developed from the early childhood. I think that his guilt over Cedric's and Sirius' deaths is MUCH stronger that any guilt over his parents death." Del replies : His guilt over Cedric's death is still very much unconscious. Harry almost never *consciously* blames himself for that. He does it only in his dreams. As for his guilt over Sirius's death, it's not really there yet. But it could be that when it does hit home (and with a little help from the realisation that in some way his parents did *actually* die because of him), it will burst his guilt-dam, finally releasing all his guilt, and allowing him to see that most of it is imaginary and/or undeserved. This in turn would allow him to make decisions based on something more reasonable than unconscious guilt. Del From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Wed Nov 10 12:31:49 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2004 12:31:49 -0000 Subject: Goodness - Free Will - Harry (Harry's good core) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117534 Siriusly Snapey Susan wrote: >> Sometimes when a person does X, he ends up feeling good [as in, rewarded, "right," warm & fuzzy inside], and this can be a positive reinforcement for the behavior in question. Intrinsic reward, you know? I maintain that for many people is simply feels good to do good. Harry may have found that sharing with Ron, for instance, made him feel good about himself. And he liked feeling good about himself, particularly after years of being told that he's worthless. This kind of positive experience might well motivate future action.<< Carol responds: > As I read this thread (and I admit I'm still catching up here and > may have missed something), the question is why Harry shared with > Ron in the first place. I agree that feeling good about sharing > was a kind of reward ("positive reinforcement") that would lead > him to want to do the same thing again, but I don't think he could > have anticipated that feeling. SSSusan: You're right that the original question was more along the lines of why would he ever have tried something like sharing with Ron? But if you follow the thread back up near to the top, you'll see that I attempted to address this once before. The positive reinforcement thing I've mentioned here is one aspect of learning behavior, but it's not the only. Part of learning is also *identifying* with others and *modeling* their behavior. Think about teenagers and Britney Spears--being like her is certainly not something most parents likely positively reinforce. Or the little boy who starts carrying around tools because the next door neighbor carries tools & works on the house all the time. When we're talking about a kid in an ugly situation growing up, as Harry was, I think the common expectation is that he will identify with those who are picking on him and become a bully himself, but that's NOT always the case, which was my point. Heaven only knows WHY it is, but some kids will identify with people outside the situation--with people they would much rather be like. I used my own dad as an example. His dad was an alcoholic who didn't take care of his family. One reaction would be to be just like him. Another, the one my dad took, is to look for OTHER WAYS OF BEING outside the models in one's immediate family. This is what I think Harry did. Perhaps he didn't like being bullied, being made fun of. Perhaps he saw the Dursleys as selfish, nasty people and he didn't want to be like them. I mean, the kid went to school, where there were surely all types of people amongst the kids & teachers. It's not likely that he was never exposed to any other way of being. Sometimes I think people analyze things as if Harry grew up in a vacuum. He did not. He went to school, he visited Mrs. Figg, he played out of doors. There were other people around him besides just the Dursleys. Carol: > We know that Harry saw very little sharing at the Dursleys (who > constantly gave the ungrateful Dudley whatever he wanted but > received nothing in return, certainly not respect or affection), > and he had no friends of his own at school, but I would be quite > surprised if he hadn't witnessed friends sharing with each other > at school and receiving mutual pleasure. If so, he may have > unconsciously stored up such memories as reflecting something that > he wanted for himself. On the train with Ron, he suddenly had an > opportunity to experience that pleasure. He wouldn't need to feel > good *about himself* to want to repeat the experience: SSSusan: Exactly what I'm saying about having seen it in others. But I don't understand the downplaying of his feeling good about himself after doing so. He'd likely seen it in others, yes, and decided to take the same action once he had something to share. That's modeling. But the feeling good about the experience part is the positive reinforcement. It's REINFORCEMENT, as in *strengthening* the behavior. I clearly didn't do a very good job of explaining this initially, but learning behavior is often a multi-faceted thing, and I was trying to say that I don't think it's that difficult to understand why Harry would have learned to do good things. It would have been EASILY understood if he'd learned not to, because he was so surrounded with negative role models and negative experiences, but it isn't impossible to comprehend that he would learn to do so either, because he wasn't in a "Dursley Vacuum." All it would have taken was having seen enough goodness or altruism outside that house to have decided to try a bit himself. The positive reinforcement then adds to the experience. Not to mention the idea that nobody came to HIS aid--perhaps he decided he'd like to do the opposite for others. Siriusly Snapey Susan From saraandra at saraandra.plus.com Wed Nov 10 12:32:18 2004 From: saraandra at saraandra.plus.com (amanitamuscaria1) Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2004 12:32:18 -0000 Subject: Timing of the prophecy In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117535 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "nkafkafi" wrote: > > > > Del replies : > > A last piece of info if you want it : in his after-disaster speech, > DD > > says : > > > > 'Sybill's prophecy could have applied to two wizard boys, both born > at > > the end of July that year' > > > > Neri: > > Good catch, Del. This "that year" indeed seems to imply that the > prophecy was given in 1980. But I'm still not convinced. > Trelawney's "nearly sixteen years" (said in September 1985) seems > more specific in time than DD's "cold wet night sixteen years ago" > (said in June 1986). The "cold and wet" also implies winter or > autumn.>snip< > Neri AmanitaMuscaria now - Neri - In the U.K., we can very easily get "cold wet nights" - nay, we get cold wet days in the middle of 'summer'. I don't think that's the seasonal hint you're taking it for. However, we won't know until she tells us, so theorise away! Cheers. AmanitaMuscaria From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Wed Nov 10 12:59:15 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2004 12:59:15 -0000 Subject: Is Harry feeling guilty for being alive ? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117536 > Del replies : > *Everyone* wants to protect the people they love. But how many > 11-year-old kids go and fight grown powerful wizards to prevent them > from obtaining some magical object ? Answer : 1. Plus the 2 that he > led into it (they were happy to follow, but I doubt they'd have done > it on their own). Harry's reaction in going after Snape/Quirrellmort > was NOT the normal reaction of an 11-year-old boy. Alla: Of course it is not the normal reaction of eleven year old boy, but this IS the normal (I would even say typical) reaction of the young hero in the fantasy quest. Will in the "Darkness rising" series for example also discovers his powers when he is eleven years old and does many heroic things at this young age. This is part of the appeal of Harry's character to me. In some ways he is a normal, I would even say typical boy, but in some ways he is a typical hero. He is real, but he is not completely real as a character. Take Ron for example. he is a GREAT character and I like him, but he IS a typical boy, way too down to earth for me. If I want to read the book about character like Ron, I will choose more reality- based book. Am I confusing? > > Del replies : snip. > His guilt over Cedric's death is still very much unconscious. Harry >This in turn would allow him to make decisions based on > something more reasonable than unconscious guilt. > Alla: I disagree. He remebers his dreams, so his conscience is aware. Also, to ME to read the series as if Harry was basing his decisions ONLY on his guilt would be destroying his image as a young hero and I don't want to interpret the books like that. As I said , to ME the guilt is there, but there are other factors he hs basing his decisions to fight. From willsonkmom at msn.com Wed Nov 10 13:07:06 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2004 13:07:06 -0000 Subject: Life Debts was Why has DD never suggested Snape thank Harry In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117537 Ces wrote: > Snape is at least honorable in the fact that he is paying off a > wizard's debt to someone he hates. Perhaps he's doing it so he can > hate James in peace - that's his decision and he has to live with > it. But he is paying off that debt to someone who is only seeing the > bad in him. Who knows what a little thanks from both to each other > could do. > Potioncat: I think, but I don't remember who I stole this idea from (oblivate seems to have worked poorly and backward at that) that there is no such thing as a Life Debt. I can't find the cannon where I hide my copy of SS/PS, so I can't quote it. But DD says something along the line of 'having a strange idea that he owes your father a debt for saving his life.' Harry and almost all of us have taken that bit of conversation and worked out an elaborate idea of how and when Life Debts are formed. But I don't think they exist at all. There is one other (I think only one) time that it is mentioned in canon, and that is when Harry tosses it up to Snape and Snape insists that James was in on the prank. Does anyone who is better prepared and more persuasive have any ideas? From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Wed Nov 10 13:42:26 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2004 13:42:26 -0000 Subject: Occlumency: Relax or resist? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117538 Carol wrote: > > I think we know a great deal about how Occlumency works, and we > > can see when and why Harry fails or gets it right. Before the > > first lesson, Snape tells him what he needs to do--*not* relax > > but to *resist*--to protect his mind from intrusion as he did > > with the Imperius Curse (534). Mindy: > For around a year now, I have heard people say that Harry needed > to relax to learn Occlumency and it always bothered me. I too got > the impression that Snape was telling Harry to focus on > resisting. As he did with the Imperius Curse. Harry had to clear > his mind to deflect that curse too. Clear it in order to focus on > deflecting, really. That does seem remarkably similar to what he > was supposed to do with Occlumency. Stop letting emotion get in > the way and focus on resisting. I thought Carol did quite a nice > job in using canon quotes to support this idea. > Here are some common complaints: "Snape didn't tell Harry how he > was supposed to stop the Legilimency." Well, I am not so sure > Lupid did that bang up of a job at first either. He has Harry > practice without even a Boggart to start with. Harry says the > incantation a few times and produces something that "looked like a > wisp of silver gas" (POA, Scholastic Hardcover pg 238). From what > we now know of the Patronus Charm, that certainly doesn't seem > like Harry has mastered the defense. Yet, Lupin then opened the > case and let the Boggart out. When Harry inevitably fails, Lupin > says he didn't expect Harry to do it the first time anyway. Snape > told Harry that the defense was similar to how he resisted the > Imperius Curse. Probably not the most helpful information. Yet, > is it really all that *less* helpful than Lupin's preparation? > Especially with Snape's follow-ups to focus, clear his mind, and > control his emotions, etc. > > I guess I could go on, but I think I made my point. I just don't > see how Harry was any better prepared to start learning the > Patronus Charm than he was to learn Occlumency. > Seems to me like the only difference was that Harry didn't *want* > to learn Occlumency. > Granted, another difference between the lessons is Harry's > differing feelings towards Snape and Lupin as people. And Snape's > and Lupin's feelings towards Harry. > > We saw Lupin teach the Patronus Charm by having Harry confront the > Boggart/Dementor. We saw Snape attempt to teach Harry Occlumency > by confronting him with Legilimency. BTW, we also saw Crouch! > Moody teach Harry how to resist the Imperius Curse by confronting > him with Imperio. There didn't seem to be any outrage or shock > from the faculty after that. SSSusan: I think you've got some quite valid points here, especially on the relaxation vs. focusing issue and about how Crouch!Moody's approach wasn't so different from Snape's. I'm sure there are others who will agree with you--and those who will disagree...vehemently. :-) I was ready to say "But..." until you brought up the point that there is a [potentially big, imo] difference in that Harry WANTED to learn the patronus charm. He sought Lupin out and asked for help. He never was given a fully satisfactory reason for why he *needed* to learn Occlumency, and unfortuantely I think that made a big difference, coupled w/ Harry's dislike/distrust of Snape. But the one place I'd still argue there is a difference is that Lupin did at least do a bit of explaining about the *process* and what Harry was to *do*. And practicing the spell a few times *was* important, imo. It gave Harry a focus; it gave him a little confidence that he knew what approach to take. Snape merely said to clear his mind and defend himself. Huh? I would argue that the first is difficult enough but the second would make no sense to Harry--how would the kid know how to do this? Is there a spell? Is there a certain kind of focus which is required? I wouldn't even have minded Snape going at him full-force in the first lesson if he'd just told Harry *something* in these categories. OTOH you have a point that Snape did point out that it was similar to what Harry had done w/ Crouch!Moody and the Imperius. I think that *was* valuable information which Harry would have done well to focus on. I would say that Snape DID provide a nice intro, actually -- he gave info on what Occ. and Leg. *are* but not on their mechanisms. He *did* say Harry could use any means to disarm him, so that was helpful. But he didn't say what ways of "defending himself" might possibly work. "[Dumbledore] wishes me to teach you HOW to close your mind to the Dark Lord" [emphasis mine]. So where's the HOW? People often say, "What if there wasn't anything much specific to tell Harry?" I just think that misses the point. If there isn't much specific in the way of "doing Occlumency," then Snape could have told Harry *that*. You know? Say this: "Occlumency isn't something you learn from a book, Potter; you learn by doing. Your job is to empty your mind as much as possible and to attempt to defend yourself." And, okay, he did say much of this! But he should have gone on and said, "You can try to do this by _____" and filled in the blank with a few examples. Use of Protego? Use of Expelliarmus? Use of a new spell Harry was likely to be unfamiliar with? Concentrating on a specific *kind* of thing? Snape at least knows what works for HIM; he could have mentioned a possibility or two. Snape did some explication--I'll admit more of it than I realized before reading Mindy's comments & heading back to the chapter. But when Harry *admitted* he was having trouble clearing his mind of all emotion, did Snape offer any suggestions? No. He merely said, *savagely*, "Then you will find yourself easy prey for the Dark Lord!" How is this teaching Harry? It's true information, but it's not teaching him anything. In short, the point that what Snape did and what Crouch!Moody did were quite similar is important. But when Harry was surprised by C! M's Imperius, he was *successful* at shaking it off. When Harry was hit with Snape's Legilimens, he *wasn't* very successful at shaking it off. Snape didn't recognize the difference as meaning they needed to stop and talk some more about the hows; he simply proceeded to get more & more annoyed with Harry, as if he should have known it all. Siriusly Snapey Susan From nrenka at yahoo.com Wed Nov 10 14:00:22 2004 From: nrenka at yahoo.com (nrenka) Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2004 14:00:22 -0000 Subject: Occlumency: Relax or resist? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117539 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, SongBird3411 at a... wrote: >> Carol wrote: >> I think we know a great deal about how Occlumency works, and we can >> see when and why Harry fails or gets it right. Before the first >> lesson, Snape tells him what he needs to do--*not* relax but to >> *resist*--to protect his mind from intrusion as he did with the >> Imperius Curse (534). > > Now me, Mindy: I wanted to thank Carol for bringing up this idea. > For around a year now, I have heard people say that Harry needed to > relax to learn Occlumency and it always bothered me. I too got the > impression that Snape was telling Harry to focus on resisting. As > he did with the Imperius Curse. Harry had to clear his mind to > deflect that curse too. Clear it in order to focus on deflecting, > really. That does seem remarkably similar to what he was supposed > to do with Occlumency. Stop letting emotion get in the way and > focus on resisting. I thought Carol did quite a nice job in using > canon quotes to support this idea. Let me combine postage and work through this: Since I started the martial arts metaphors, let me explain to make myself really clear what I think is going on here. To start: when I say 'relax', this *does not* mean 'give up fighting and roll over'. Think of it this way: there are two extremes, one of complete stiffness (which makes it impossible to resist effectively, since stiff things are easily broken), and complete limpness (where the person is not taking control of themself and is easily manipulated). True relaxation is the midpoint, where the person is alive and has feeling and power and control, but is not tight. This is the most desirable condition to be in, because it's when anyone is most fully functional. I am perfectly happy to take as canon that Occlumency requires resistance. My contention is that to really, truly be able to resist, in a general sense (both mentally and physically, in my experience), one must partake of some part of this state of relaxation. I'm applying an interpretive framework *to* the canon references, trying to get at what it would take to resist, and what that means. Carol wrote (117268): >> Snape tells Harry to use his wand or any other means he can think >> of to defend himself because he's about to break into Harry's >> mind. He then advises Harry to "*brace yourself*"--the exact >> opposite of relaxation (OoP Am. ed. 534). Actually, no. To really brace yourself, you have to be relaxed, in my experience, both physically and mentally. When I've worked with beginners, doing some basic push-and-resist exercises, either physical or mental tightness means I can push them over with ease. A senior student who inhabits that middle state, aware but not tight, feels like a rock, utterly braced and immovable. It's rather like how an extremely tight grip is often not the strongest (exerting lots of effort), but how a baby's grip (very relaxed) is naturally very strong (for its size, of course!) Carol wrote (117268): >> Snape tells him to clear his mind--not the same as relaxing >> because it requires effort and "discipline" to "focus" (Snape's >> words, 535). Snape is certainly correct that Harry's anger is undoing him. Anger is something that clouds the mind, but it is also the absolute opposite of relaxation. Mental focusing is this odd thing wherein you have to concentrate, but too hard and you become tight and things don't work. This obtains in a number of realms, not just martial arts. Playing piano hops to mind as something that demands mental relaxation too...think too hard about each note and you'll lose the track of a complex fugue very quickly. I do think that Snape is trying, but my contention would be that Snape's teaching is not helping Harry to get into a state where he is really able to resist. Harry's successes strike me-the-reader as one- offs, obtained through force instead of a solid understanding of technique and the feeling necessary for repeating it on a reliable basis. With the Imperius Curse, Harry listens to the inner voice in his head, and reaches an 'agreement' of sorts with that voice, not to jump. He does not flail, he does not 'struggle', he does not shoot off curses that he doesn't realize. Harry being able to reach the voice (his true self, perhaps, which knows it does not want to obey the curse) is like a coordination of all of his self into one purpose- -classic result/goal of meditation and other relaxation forms. (I always feel *more* awake and sharp and alive after some meditation-- zoning off is not what it's about, IMHO.) It's hard to do that sort of thing reliably without someone helping you learn how to do it, and it's really hard to learn it when you're in pain and not understanding what's going on. > Mindy: > Doesn't sound like facing the Boggart was any less traumatic than > facing Legilimens Snape. I don't think they're quite the same thing. Both require the drawing upon of personal resources (the happy memory for a Patronus), and both are drawing up memories, but the Patronus is an externalized thing--you're summoning up your memories to send them *out* and conquer the dementor, and Occlumency is internal--you're trying to defend your own mind with a shield. One of these is by far more accomplishable with a great deal of stress as a motivator, as we see Harry summon Prongs when he absolutely must, while Occlumency does not seem particularly attainable under stress--it's not the kind of thing that kicking out in a panic can get you. All evidence points to Occlumency requiring getting down with your own mind, and I respectfully submit that that's *hard*. I know that these are analogies, but a lot of these are principles that, to be somewhat contrary about it, are very true, in my experience. I don't know if they apply fully to Occlumency--they may well not, and we may get confirmation of that. But I argue steadfastly from my and many others' experiences that if resistance is the aim, relaxation (in this true way, not the common perception) is a necessary component. This explains for me, anyways, part of why Harry was having such difficulties--there was something missing that is very hard to teach. My two cents. -Nora is happy to try to explain anything else confusing, natch From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Wed Nov 10 14:14:01 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2004 14:14:01 -0000 Subject: Is Harry feeling guilty for being alive ? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117540 Alla wrote : "Of course it is not the normal reaction of eleven year old boy, but this IS the normal (I would even say typical) reaction of the young hero in the fantasy quest. Will in the "Darkness rising" series for example also discovers his powers when he is eleven years old and does many heroic things at this young age. This is part of the appeal of Harry's character to me. In some ways he is a normal, I would even say typical boy, but in some ways he is a typical hero. He is real, but he is not completely real as a character. Take Ron for example. he is a GREAT character and I like him, but he IS a typical boy, way too down to earth for me. If I want to read the book about character like Ron, I will choose more reality- based book. Am I confusing?" Del replies : Not confusing, no. I just feel differently. I personally don't like the obvious heroes, the characters that don't react like normal people. I dislike it even more when their authors try to make them pass as normal people, except in exceptional circumstances. So to me, either Harry is normal or he's not. If he's normal, then I want to understand why he does exceptional things, and I can relate to him. If he's not normal, then I feel free to hold him to a higher standard than normal boys, and I don't care much about him on a personal level. To use an analogy : one can be either Frodo or Legolas, but not alternatively one and the other. I relate to and admire Frodo, and I worship Legolas as some kind of magical and wondrous creature (even before the movie ;-P), but I can't do it the other way around. And while I can understand and excuse all the little flaws in Frodo's character and actions, I couldn't take them in Legolas. Inversely, I'd have taken Frodo's death as the very personal death of a real person, but the death of Legolas as the death of the last dodo : a loss to the world at large by principle, but nothing very personal to me. Let me illustrate with the first book. In the first book, Harry is first presented as a very normal boy who thinks little of himself. Then he discovers he's a wizard with a peculiar past story. The boy who thinks he's nobody and turns out to be someone special, everything's fine until then. Then he meets Ron and Hermione, and the friendless little boy becomes a part of a trio where everyone completes the others. Again, very normal. In the end, they end up working together to defeat the villain. Their cooperation, coupled with Harry's special thing (the protection from his mother), leads to their victory. This was a very satisfying book for me : a tale about a nobody who discovers that he's a special somebody with a special talent, and that with the help of others he can accomplish great things. It's very typical, and everyone can relate to it : everyone is a special somebody with a special talent, who can accomplish great things by cooperating with and relying on others. But now this story seems to be shifting from "Harry has a special talent" to "Harry is different (superior)". I just don't like that. The whole point of the HP books for me was that Harry is normal. He *has* a special talent, but he *is* normal. Moreover, I'm not so sure that JKR intends Harry to be so special. The Prophecy doesn't say that Harry will be some kind of Wizardus Superior. It just says that he will have a special power. This is why I'd rather find a *normal* explanation to why Harry acts exceptionally : so I can keep identifying with Harry. I want him to be Frodo, not Legolas. Alla wrote : "Also, to ME to read the series as if Harry was basing his decisions ONLY on his guilt would be destroying his image as a young hero and I don't want to interpret the books like that. As I said , to ME the guilt is there, but there are other factors he hs basing his decisions to fight." Del replies : You're reading too much into what I said. I did mention that Harry loves his friends. Harry also wants to do what he thinks is right. He wants to prevent the bad guys from gaining power. All sorts of good reasons and incentives. What I'm saying is that Harry does more than other kids with the same kind of motivation would do. And I'm wondering if that additional push to act wouldn't come from an unconscious sense of guilt. Again, if that push just comes from the fact that he's a hero, then that would spoil everything for me because this last step between intention and action is precisely where most normal people stop. I need to feel that Harry doesn't do special things just because that's what heroes do. I'm not sure I'm making much sense :-) Del From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com Wed Nov 10 14:20:06 2004 From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (Barry Arrowsmith) Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2004 14:20:06 +0000 Subject: Inside Harry's mind Message-ID: <9EE44AEE-3323-11D9-A88D-000A9577CB94@btconnect.com> No: HPFGUIDX 117541 A few quotes to start with: "...and Slytherin will help you on the way to greatness, no doubt about that..." ( the Sorting Hat, PS/SS) "Voldemort put a bit of himself in me?" (Harry, CoS) "...there's something funny about the Potter kid, we all know that." (Moody, OoP) " Quite astonishing, the way you continue to wriggle out of very tight holes....*snakelike*, in fact" (authors emphasis. Malfoy OoP) It's long been accepted that there's a Voldy fragment in Harry, though the details of just what magic caused it has been the subject of much debate. (Though if what happened was known to us, JKR said that there would be no point in writing books 6 & 7. Does that sound as if it was a simple bouncing AK? Not to me.) Less time has been spent discussing *how much* of Harry is Voldy. The first quote is interesting in that it can have variant meanings; is it Slytherin House the Sorting Hat is referring to, or old Salazar himself? (Possession theory would allow the latter.) Secondly, the wording: not *could* help - but *will* help. Since the Hat looks at future potential as well as current characteristics, just what fraction of Harry was it measuring? The Potter or Voldy bit? Did it foresee the former succumbing to the latter perhaps? There's a spectrum of possibilities, at one end there being just a small isolated fragment in there, through to a major chunk - even a possibility that Harry *of himself* is not magical at all, all his magical ability being derived from the transplant. Choose for yourself where in the range of possibilities you think it falls. For myself, I'd go lower middle; not insignificant, but not overwhelming - yet. But I also think that something very important but so far largely unappreciated happened in the graveyard. (Oh, a small digression to repeat a fun possibility I mentioned last year - we're led to believe that Snape hates and fears Voldy. What if his reaction to Harry is because as an ex-DE and part-time Legilimens he sees Voldy inside Harry? Snape sees the potential for an ESE!Harry, a demi-clone of Snape's bitterest enemy. A thoroughly entertaining turning of the tables.) Since GH Harry has had 'Lily's Protection', an anti-Voldy shield that protected not against spells cast with evil intentions, but against Voldy the individual. Quirrell!Mort could cast spells, but he couldn't touch. After GoF Voldy demonstrates that now he *can* touch - while posturing to his fawning DEs he admits that Harry had been given protection that meant "...I could not touch the boy. [...] but no matter, I can touch him now." And does so. But there is not just a Voldy exterior to Harry, there's something interior too. That piece inside him. For whatever reason it wasn't destroyed or expelled at GH; it sat there. Occasionally it would flare up, the scar would hurt and Harry would know Voldy was up to something specifically Potter orientated. There were also dreams when Voldy was considering doing something nasty to him. But no link, not like there was in OoP where for nearly a year his scar played up more or less continuously, thoughts and ideas passed to and fro and Harry's behaviour showed drastic changes. No longer the well-meaning, slightly dim, ready to jump to the wrong conclusion for the right reasons Harry, but a progression to a stroppy, irritable, bad-tempered, disobedient and thoroughly awkward customer ready to be misled by outside influences - even after he'd been warned of the possibility. Why the change? The events in the graveyard, of course. Any restraint the Lily Protection had on the Voldy!Fragment has now gone and it's effect is beginning to show. DD is worried about it too - "But in essence divided?" A question, note; not a statement. After Harry has his Arthur dream DD is worried that Harry is quite literally not himself. Previously it was only the Sorting Hat, DD and to a lesser extent Harry who may have wondered. Now others are too. Moody, the implacable Auror trained to sniff out Dark Magic thinks there's something funny going on. And Lucius; now why would he consider Harry snakelike? Just what does he know or suspect, and where is he getting his information from? Hmm. During KR's web-cast back in March there were the following Q&As:- Q: 'Are Harry's powers going to get any greater?' A: Yes, he's really progressing as a wizard now (which is lucky, because I know what's in store for him). Q: 'Regarding Harry's subconscious feelings, how has it changed from book 1 to book 5?' A: 'Well he's obviously been through a lot since book 1 and book 5 was the book where he cracked up a little. In book 6, the WW is really at war again and he has to master his own feelings to make himself useful.' Good oh! Could be plenty of action, Harry in for a hard time of it, maybe a Weasley corpse or two littering the scenery. Splendid! But that second one - I have suggested previously that Harry tries to avoid his 'fate' by refusing to co-operate with DD any more after the death of Sirius. Could that be what is meant by 'mastering his feelings'? Or are there a totally alien set of feelings that have to be mastered? Could be fun. Kneasy From spotthedungbeetle at hotmail.com Wed Nov 10 15:27:01 2004 From: spotthedungbeetle at hotmail.com (dungrollin) Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2004 15:27:01 -0000 Subject: Life Debts was Why has DD never suggested Snape thank Harry In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117542 > Ces wrote: > > Snape is at least honorable in the fact that he is paying off a > > wizard's debt to someone he hates. Perhaps he's doing it so he > > can hate James in peace - that's his decision and he has to live > > with it. But he is paying off that debt to someone who is only > > seeing the bad in him. Who knows what a little thanks from both > > to each other > > could do. > > > > Potioncat: > I think, but I don't remember who I stole this idea from (oblivate > seems to have worked poorly and backward at that) that there is no > such thing as a Life Debt. > > I can't find the cannon where I hide my copy of SS/PS, so I can't > quote it. But DD says something along the line of 'having a > strange idea that he owes your father a debt for saving his life.' > Harry and almost all of us have taken that bit of conversation and > worked out an elaborate idea of how and when Life Debts are > formed. But I don't think they exist at all. > > There is one other (I think only one) time that it is mentioned in > canon, and that is when Harry tosses it up to Snape and Snape > insists that James was in on the prank. > > Does anyone who is better prepared and more persuasive have any > ideas? Dungrollin: I don't have my books with me, either, but the main canon in support of the idea is at the end of PoA, when DD's explaining that saving Pettigrew's life wasn't such a bad thing. He says something along the lines of 'When one wizard saves another wizards life, a certain bond is formed.' And then later 'This is magic at its deepest and most mysterious.' And some stuff about Voldy not being too pleased that one of his servants owes Harry a debt. (Was it 'a debt'? Or 'his life'? Was it 'a certain bond' or 'a deep magical bond'?) It's a short step from that to, knowing that James saved Snape's life, assuming that the same 'certain bond' existed between the two of them. IIRC at the end of SS/PS, DD doesn't call it a strange idea, but neither does he mention anything about the debt being magical. Perhaps someone with their books can quote what he does say... The phrase 'life debt' doesn't occur in canon anywhere, but it's a less cumbersome way of describing this bond (coined by whom?), which is most definitely canonical. What we don't have, is any canon that says life debts are passed down the generations, nor what happens if you repay them or not. Nor do we know how directly one must be involved to count for the award (one could concoct a situation in which a tiny action eventually had the unintended consequence of saving a wizard's life - would that count too?). I flirted with the idea that there's some magical penalty if you are in a position to save someone's life (someone to whom you owe a life debt) and you don't - i.e. through your inaction the person who saved your life dies. Nothing solid though, it's all speculation. Dungrollin Who really shouldn't reply to posts like this when away from her books. From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Wed Nov 10 17:43:50 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2004 17:43:50 -0000 Subject: Is Harry feeling guilty for being alive ? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117543 > Del replies : > Not confusing, no. I just feel differently. I personally don't like > the obvious heroes, the characters that don't react like normal > people. I dislike it even more when their authors try to make them > pass as normal people, except in exceptional circumstances. > > So to me, either Harry is normal or he's not. > > If he's normal, then I want to understand why he does exceptional > things, and I can relate to him. > > If he's not normal, then I feel free to hold him to a higher standard > than normal boys, and I don't care much about him on a personal level. > > To use an analogy : one can be either Frodo or Legolas, but not > alternatively one and the other. I relate to and admire Frodo, and I > worship Legolas as some kind of magical and wondrous creature (even > before the movie ;-P), but I can't do it the other way around. And > while I can understand and excuse all the little flaws in Frodo's > character and actions, I couldn't take them in Legolas. Alla: I think I understand, oh maybe I am not, so correct me please if you find that I misinterpreted your words. First let me clarify - under not normal I only meant to be more heroic than the normal person would. You are saying that "heroes" as characters do not appeal to you, correct? Well, fair enough. Funnily enough, usually I don't have much use for them either. But suprisingly, Harry is not an obvious type of hero for me. First reason is because I am not sure whether he survives, so even if he prevails over Vodemort (which is pretty much a guarantee, I think) he may lose his life and even though Dumbledore talks about death sa next great adventure and I am sure JKR will reunite him with his loved ones, I will still consider that he loses at the end if he dies. Secondary exactly because Harry is both a normal boy and more "heroic" than normal boy. I do like when author does that and I much prefer Harry to be that way. I can both identify to his normal qualities and admire his "heroic" side, his "old soul" as JKR once said. Actually, who says that wanting to save the world could not be a "normal" quality? You said that one cannot be both Frodo and Legolas. True, but what do you make of Aragorn? He is a normal person and a hero. From willsonkmom at msn.com Wed Nov 10 17:57:46 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2004 17:57:46 -0000 Subject: Life Debts was Why has DD never suggested Snape thank Harry In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117544 > >> Ces wrote: Snape is at least honorable in the fact that he is paying off a wizard's debt to someone he hates. snip >> > Potioncat: snip Harry and almost all of us have taken that bit of conversation and worked out an elaborate idea of how and when Life Debts are formed. But I don't think they exist at all. There is one other (I think only one) time that it is mentioned in canon, and that is when Harry tosses it up to Snape and Snape insists that James was in on the prank. >>> Dungrollin: > > I don't have my books with me, either, but the main canon in support of the idea is at the end of PoA, when DD's explaining that saving Pettigrew's life wasn't such a bad thing. He says something along the lines of 'When one wizard saves another wizards life, a certain bond is formed.' And then later 'This is magic at its deepest and most mysterious.' And some stuff about Voldy not being too pleased that one of his servants owes Harry a debt. (Was it 'a debt'? Or 'his life'? Was it 'a certain bond' or 'a deep magical bond'?) It's a short step from that to, knowing that James saved Snape's life, assuming that the same 'certain bond' existed between the two of them. Potioncat: I found the PoA quotes. You're pretty much right. PoA chp 22 DD speaking, "Pettigrew owes his life to you. You have sent Voldemort a deputy who is in your debt... When one wizard saves another wizard's life, it creates a certain bond between them...and I'm much mistaken if Voldemort wants his servant in the debt of Harry Potter." and then: "This is magic at its deepest, its most impenetrable, Harry. But trust me...the time may come when you will be very glad you saved Pettigrew's life." OK, so there goes the idea that there is no connection between saving someone's life and some sort of "something" debt, bond...whatever. Can anyone locate the place where Snape and Harry talk about it? I wonder if DD ever said to James: "The day will come when you will be very glad you saved Severus' life." From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Wed Nov 10 18:05:35 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2004 18:05:35 -0000 Subject: Life Debts was Why has DD never suggested Snape thank Harry In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117545 Potioncat: snip. > I wonder if DD ever said to James: "The day will come when you will > be very glad you saved Severus' life." Alla: Oh, even better: "The day will come when your son will be wishing really hard that you would never save Severus' life " :) From ginnysthe1 at yahoo.com Wed Nov 10 18:13:26 2004 From: ginnysthe1 at yahoo.com (ginnysthe1) Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2004 18:13:26 -0000 Subject: The Riddles' Murders (WAS: The only one he ever feared? In-Reply-To: <20041110002245.25064.qmail@web53106.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117546 JP wrote: > I think that the Office focuses on underage magic, use of Muggle artifacts to play practical jokes or to harm Muggles and such. < Then Kim (me) wrote: > But then the deaths of three Riddles from Avada Kedavras would surely have been considered "harm to Muggles," as you say. In any case, AK (Avada Kedavra) is also an Unforgiveable Curse and it wouldn't matter if the wizard who performed it was "of age" -- performing AK, Crucio, or Imperius curses is supposed to land you in Azkaban. Juli replied: > I completely agree with JP, Harry received 2 letters from Mafalda Hopkirk because he did underage magic. I don't think her department tracks all magic, even unforgivable curses, they just track underage magic. They would have learned that Arthur uses magic on his Ford Anglia, they never knew it could fly until Ron & Harry used it to get from King's cross to Hogwarts, so this propably means the only magic the MoM tracks is underage magic. ... By the way, wizards come of age at 17, so if LV was 17 when he killed his dad and grandparents, nobody would have noticed, unless like DD they read the muggle's newspaper and the autopsy report (nothing wrong except the fact they were dead) which I doubt.< Katrina had written (in a different post, same thread): > What LV fears about DD is what he knows. I've heard it postulated that when TR dropped "off the radar screen" after he finished at Hogwarts, it was because of the triple AK murder in [Little Hangleton] < Then Debbie replied to Katrina: > I don't believe that Tom Riddle disappeared *because* he was fleeing the scene of his parents' murders. Rather, he decided to leave to seek out what Dumbledore calls "the very worst of our kind" who could instruct him in the Dark Arts, but before he left he stopped off in Little Hangleton for the revenge murder of his parents. ... < Then bboyminn responded: > Unless I read it wrong, I think Tom murdered his parents in the summer between his 6th and 7th year at Hogwarts. Since he came back to school, it doesn't seem like anyone made any connnection to Tom and the death of the Riddles. ... Once he graduated, he sought out the Dark Arts as a source of power that other, weaker, people were unwilling to tap. I think Tom was in the process of transforming himself into Voldemort, the self-proclaimed most powerful wizard in the world, champion of the pureblood cause, and the next supreme evil overlord of the universe. A wizard so powerful and ruthless that all would fear to speak his name. ... I often wondered if Tom collected the inheritance on his parents estate, and used that money to finance his transformation?< Then Carol responded: >You're right that the murder was committed about a year before he left to seek out Dark wizards though my impression is that he was pursuing immortality through transformations rather than seeking power or championing the pureblood cause. ... The Muggles didn't know about him (only Frank Bryce saw him leaving the scene of the crime and no one believed him). I very much doubt that he collected his inheritance or he would immediately have aroused his suspicions: he benefited from the crime, so he would automatically be a suspect, and he fit the description of the mysterious teenage boy. ... Dumbledore says that he knew about the crime because he reads the Muggle newspapers, but no one else in the WW was apparently aware of it. Why Dumbledore didn't report his suspicions to the authorities, I don't know. Certainly a Priori Incantatem on Tom's wand would have shown three AKs and proved him guilty. Possibly DD thought the MoM would concern itself with the deaths of three Muggles. Also I don't think that area was monitored; Tom's mother, the only witch we know of in the area, was long dead, and Tom himself had lived in an orphanage, quite possibly in London and certainly not in Little Hangleton because no one there knew of his existence (his father had evidently placed him somewhere out of sight, out of mind). From what we've seen, the MoM mostly monitors underage wizards in Muggle areas and even that practice seems to be recent; Lily Potter was evidently able to transfigure rats into teacups without getting into trouble, and Tom's youth was long before hers. I agree with Steve that the security around Privet Drive is particularly acute; nothing of the sort would have been needed in Little Hangleton in 1944 or thereabouts. Also the MoM's security, when it *is* in place, can apparently determine what kind of spell was performed (e.g., a hover charm at 4 Privet Drive in CoS). Surely if Little Hangleton were under the MoM's radar, they would have detected three Avada Kedavras, and since the dead Muggles were Tom Riddle's parents, he would have been the immediate and only suspect? ... I think he committed the murders, suspected by nobody (except Frank Bryce and Dumbledore), returned to school, and left on his quest for Transformation without a knut to his name, quite possibly leaving everything but his wand and the clothes on his back to one of the friends who already called him Lord Voldemort, the future father of Lucius Malfoy, who had in his keeping Tom's school diary and perhaps a few other artifacts that he passed down to his son. [signed] Carol, challenging anyone to come up with a longer sentence than her last one< Kim here: I'm definitely seeing the sense now in what you (everyone) are saying. As Carol points out though, it's very strange for DD to have kept it secret if he did suspect Tom Riddle of such foul play. Dumbledore's the "greatest wizard in the world" according to the opinion of many (myself included ;o)), but his behavior is so inexplicable at times. Maybe he's getting too old (such as in the way Harry describes him at the end of OotP) and that advanced age affects his behavior, but 50 years ago when young TR killed his father and grandparents, DD was still a youthful 100, wasn't he? So what guided his decision to keep it to himself if he did indeed suspect the student Tom Riddle of killing 3 Muggles in Little Hangleton? Sometimes DD reminds me of Emperor Claudius (in the PBS/BBC series "I, Claudius" -- correct me if this quote wasn't in the book, which I've never read) when he said, "Let all the poisons that lurk in the mud hatch out..." But also this reminds me of a different thread (can't remember what it was titled) where we discussed the possibility of DD having heard a prophecy about the birth of Tom Riddle/Lord Voldemort years ago, in the same way that he'd been the one to hear the prophecy about the coming of the vanquisher of Voldemort. Maybe he thought he couldn't interfere in the unfolding of that earlier prophecy either. And I'll toss out this last question: who do you think taught young Tom Riddle how to perform an Avada Kedavra? Alas, so many interesting questions and hypotheses, so little time before we find out the answers ... ;o) (round-nose today on account of allergies) Cheers, Kim (who'll be working on Carol's challenge in the posts ahead) From mgrantwich at yahoo.com Wed Nov 10 18:13:59 2004 From: mgrantwich at yahoo.com (Magda Grantwich) Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2004 10:13:59 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: The Riddles' Murders (WAS: The only one he ever feared? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041110181359.1577.qmail@web53108.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 117547 --- ginnysthe1 wrote: > But then the deaths of three Riddles from Avada Kedavras would > surely > have been considered "harm to Muggles," as you say. Besides that > the > MoM Improper Use Office would have noticed the three AKs in Little > Hangleton because Tom Riddle Jr. (young Lord Voldemort) *was* > underage at the time (at least it appears from canon that he was > either 16 or 17). (Which leads to another question which may have > been asked many times before -- what age is "of age" for wizards? > Sorry, my brain is a little swiss-cheesy today) > > Kim I think we should keep in mind the possibility that a lot of the MOM activities we see in the series were put in place AFTER Vold War I, when the MoM had wised up to what kind of bad stuff was possible if they weren't monitoring things. An interesting topic of conversation might be the careful way Tom Riddle worked to become powerful by working on the weak points of his society. The WW doesn't seem to have much in the way of policing or regular monitoring even now. In earlier days I suppose there was even less activity. The emphasis of wizard government seems to be protecting wizards from muggles and allowing them to be secluded and protected from prying eyes. Tom Riddle was able to take advantage of these gaps and commit murder almost with impunity. Magda __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Wed Nov 10 18:40:57 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2004 18:40:57 -0000 Subject: Is Harry feeling guilty for being alive ? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117548 Alla wrote : " First let me clarify - under not normal I only meant to be more heroic than the normal person would." Del replies : Same for me. Alla wrote : "You are saying that "heroes" as characters do not appeal to you, correct? Well, fair enough. " Del replies : It's not exactly that they don't appeal to me. Rather, they don't have the same kind of appeal. I find it much harder to closely identify with them. And because they are different to start with, I don't have as much compassion when they do get in trouble : after all, they are heroes, so let them deal with problems like true heroes, not like real people. That's for the down side, there's an up side too, but it's OT here. Alla wrote : "Funnily enough, usually I don't have much use for them either. But suprisingly, Harry is not an obvious type of hero for me." Del replies : Harry is *not* a Hero for me. He is the story's hero as in "central character", but he's not a Hero. That's why explanations centered on "he does it because he's the hero" don't go well with me. To me, Harry is a normal person thrown into abnormal circumstances, just like any kid thrown into a war for example. They are everyday heroes, if you prefer. Alla wrote : "First reason is because I am not sure whether he survives, so even if he prevails over Vodemort (which is pretty much a guarantee, I think) he may lose his life and even though Dumbledore talks about death sa next great adventure and I am sure JKR will reunite him with his loved ones, I will still consider that he loses at the end if he dies." Del replies : This doesn't really come into the picture for me. It's rather the drag the existence of LV puts on his daily life that matters to me. It's the fact that LV killed his parents, and now tries to kill him. But this doesn't make a Hero, it just makes a tragic character. On the other hand, Harry also has true friends and loyal supporters, so his life is not a complete tragedy. Alla wrote : "Secondary exactly because Harry is both a normal boy and more "heroic" than normal boy. I do like when author does that and I much prefer Harry to be that way. I can both identify to his normal qualities and admire his "heroic" side, his "old soul" as JKR once said. " Del replies : That's the part I don't like. I would like it if it were *conscious*. I would like it if we saw Harry make decisions beyond his age because he's wiser than kids his age. But that's not what happens. We just see Harry jumping into situations without much thinking and luckily getting out of them without too many scratches. Alla wrote : " Actually, who says that wanting to save the world could not be a "normal" quality? " Del replies : *Wanting* to save the world is a normal quality. Systematically going against much stronger people than you is not. Every day RL example : many kids want to have peace in the school yard. But how many do we see that walk up to every single bully they see, no matter how much bigger than them, fight them, always come out quite unharmed, and repeat the process the next day, even when nobody cares about or approves of what they do? Pretty rare. Alla wrote : "You said that one cannot be both Frodo and Legolas. True, but what do you make of Aragorn? He is a normal person and a hero." Del replies : Aragorn is hardly a normal person IMO. He is the one prophesied to come and he's suspected or known this for most of his life. He was raised by Elves. He is loved by an Elven princess. And most of all he's *experienced* : he's not fresh out of innocence. He's had *decades* to ponder his role in History and to prepare for it. When duty calls, he stops and reflect before jumping. He *knows* he's a prophesied hero and he *chooses* to fulfill that role, putting aside whatever else he might want. Normal people would be the other humans : Faramir and Boromir for example (two of my very favourite characters, along with Eowyn). Two brothers who both want the same thing (saving their world) but who make radically different decisions for a number of reasons, like the way they were raised, their own temperament, their knowledge and understanding of the situation. As a result, one makes a tragically wrong decision, while the other reaches a wiser and better conclusion. They are just humans, trying to do their best, and willing to sacrifice some things to attain their great goal : every day heroes. That's how I see Harry. But this means that he *cannot* have a True Heroic side, otherwise he becomes more like Aragorn (whom I associate more with the Mythical Creatures like Gandalf and Legolas than with the normal people like Faramir and the Hobbits). Del From ginnysthe1 at yahoo.com Wed Nov 10 18:58:19 2004 From: ginnysthe1 at yahoo.com (ginnysthe1) Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2004 18:58:19 -0000 Subject: The Riddles' Murders (WAS: The only one he ever feared? In-Reply-To: <20041110181359.1577.qmail@web53108.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117549 Kim had written the following somewhat erroneous passage: >But then the deaths of three Riddles from Avada Kedavras would surely have been considered "harm to Muggles," as you (JP?) say. Besides that, the MoM Improper Use Office would have noticed the three AKs in Little Hangleton because Tom Riddle Jr. (young Lord Voldemort) *was* underage at the time (at least it appears from canon that he was either 16 or 17). (Which leads to another question which may have been asked many times before -- what age is "of age" for wizards? (Sorry, my brain is a little swiss-cheesy today)< Then Magda responded apparently at the same time that Kim was posting no. 117546 where Kim conceded "defeat": >I think we should keep in mind the possibility that a lot of the MOM activities we see in the series were put in place AFTER Vold War I, when the MoM had wised up to what kind of bad stuff was possible if they weren't monitoring things.< >An interesting topic of conversation might be the careful way Tom Riddle worked to become powerful by working on the weak points of his society. The WW doesn't seem to have much in the way of policing or regular monitoring even now. In earlier days I suppose there was even less activity. The emphasis of wizard government seems to be protecting wizards from muggles and allowing them to be secluded and protected from prying eyes. Tom Riddle was able to take advantage of these gaps and commit murder almost with impunity.< Hi, Magda (et al.) from Kim: I agree with you, that monitoring practices must have changed after the first Vold War (whoever thought that phrase up deserves a gold star!) but they sure aren't up to snuff even now. Voldemort's emissary Quirrell had a pretty easy time getting a job at Hogwarts -- haven't they heard of background checks? And once it became clear that Voldemort's "ghost" might be involved in the theft of the SS, you'd think they'd have gone to much more stringent measures than enchanting the passage to the room where it was being kept and letting a potentially suspect newbie contribute to those enchantments. Then again, too much restructuring of the ways of the WW might make for an awfully boring story. Also, your second paragraph brings to mind a particular real world "bad guy" who's been in the news a lot the last few years and who also succeeded in using the weak points of a society to wreak destructive havoc. But for my part, I'd rather not say his name... ;o) Cheers, Kim From foxmoth at qnet.com Wed Nov 10 21:14:42 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2004 21:14:42 -0000 Subject: Bad guys and black hats (was Re: Unreliable narrator) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117550 > > Alla: > > > I don't know whether I would go that far as Renee suggests that authors should refrain from explaining their texts, because for me authoritarial intention is a VERY big factor, when I try to interpret the text. > > > Renee: > Then this is where we must agree to disagree. IMO a (contemporary) literary text should basically speak for itself - barring explanations to readers from a different cultural environment, perhaps. If authors need to explain what they're trying to convey, there's something not quite right. It's a form of telling, instead of showing. > Pippin: I don't know about that -- seems kind of limited in this multi-media age. Why not regard the whole kit'n'caboodle -- text, promos, chats, website, films and legosets etc. --- as a multimedia work? I know that's not the approach we take here, but that doesn't mean it's not a legitimate way to approach the matter. Lightmaker said the biggest challenge with JKRowling.com was to create a website that would engage with readers who had different levels of knowledge -- that's got to be true for newspaper interviews as well. http://macromedia.breezecentral.com/p41484711/ Villains in children's books and movies often don't have backstories at all, so even a conventional backstory is an innovation. But JKR may not be talking just about Voldemort's backstory. The interesting thing about the quote to me is that she first says she doesn't want to present him as a typical black hat, but then invokes Hitler, who, in fiction, is often made into a typical black hat -- not only evil, but a metaphor for evil. But one of the scarier things about the historical Hitler gets lost when that happens. He was able to persuade shrewd, sophisticated people who had noble ideals and a sense of decency to support him. If Voldemort is a Hitler-style villain, I'd expect him to be able to do that as well and to see it demonstrated in Six and Seven. There's some hint that Voldemort has that talent, but we haven't seen him exercise it -- he's always characterizing the people he's charmed into helping him as naive and gullible. But this is self-serving -- naturally he doesn't want his current audience to think that people as clever as themselves could be hoodwinked. We don't even know if Ginny, Dippet, and Quirrell were as easy to mislead as he claims. Pippin From flamingstarchows at att.net Wed Nov 10 21:26:02 2004 From: flamingstarchows at att.net (texaschow) Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2004 21:26:02 -0000 Subject: The Riddles' Murders (WAS: The only one he ever feared? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117551 > > from Kim: > > I agree with you, that monitoring practices must have changed after > the first Vold War (whoever thought that phrase up deserves a gold > star!) but they sure aren't up to snuff even now. Voldemort's > emissary Quirrell had a pretty easy time getting a job at Hogwarts - - > haven't they heard of background checks? from ~Cathy~ For some reason, many people keep overlooking the fact that Quirrell was already a teacher at Hogwarts *before* he met Voldemort. He took a year off for *practical* experience, and was quivering Quirrell when he returned. (This is all mentioned early on in PS/SS, after Harry meets Professor Quirrell at the Leaky Cauldren when Hagrid takes him to London to buy his school supplies). We also find out later that Quirrell had returned with Voldemort, and that Voldemort decided to "share" Quirrell's body after blowing stealing the stone from the vault (due to the fact that Hagrid had just removed it), so he could keep a closer eye on him. Sorry I don't have the exact reference, of course I'm at work and the books are at home. However, I see this same type of reply so often I had to say something. The quote from Hagrid was something to the effect of "afraid of his own shadow, afraid of his own subject." From foxmoth at qnet.com Wed Nov 10 21:26:59 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2004 21:26:59 -0000 Subject: Occlumency: Relax or resist? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117552 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, SongBird3411 at a... wrote: > > > I guess what I am saying is that I can't quite credit the idea that Snape was torturing Harry in those lessons, when the technique was essentially the same as Lupin's. The effects of the first lessons were seemingly equally debilitating. Yet, I doubt anyone would claim Lupin was torturing Harry. (Well, except maybe Pippin. Has Pippin put forward anything along those lines? Can't remember, sorry.) Pippin: Originally, yes. But my idea of ESE!Lupin's motives has changed. I originally thought he might be a psychopath masquerading as a normal person, ala Fake!Moody. Since OOP it seems much more likely that his motives are political. In that case, he wouldn't torture anybody for fun, but he might if he needed information. Lupin suggests the anti-Dementor lessons after hearing that Harry can hear Voldemort murdering his mum. He stops them when Harry isn't passing out anymore, even though Harry still can't do more than produce an indistinct patronus. It's possible that Lupin was more interested in finding out what really happened at Godric's Hollow than in helping Harry defend himself. We shall see. Pippin From nrenka at yahoo.com Wed Nov 10 21:27:50 2004 From: nrenka at yahoo.com (nrenka) Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2004 21:27:50 -0000 Subject: Bad guys and black hats (was Re: Unreliable narrator) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117553 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "pippin_999" wrote: > Pippin: > I don't know about that -- seems kind of limited in this > multi-media age. Why not regard the whole kit'n'caboodle -- text, > promos, chats, website, films and legosets etc. --- as a > multimedia work? I know that's not the approach we take here, > but that doesn't mean it's not a legitimate way to approach the > matter. We take a rather New Critical approach here, with the text itself being the thing--but that's certainly not an unchallenged approach. On the other hand, the classic formulation of the intentional fallacy (the problems of trying to read authorial intent as a factor in the interpretation of works) done by Wimslett and Beardsley has also taken a massive beating over the past 50 years. My own inclination is to side with the New Critics but to pay very, very careful attention to the author because the text is not complete yet--ask me again when we have 'everything', such as it is. > But one of the scarier things about the historical Hitler gets > lost when that happens. He was able to persuade shrewd, > sophisticated people who had noble ideals and a sense of > decency to support him. If Voldemort is a Hitler-style villain, I'd > expect him to be able to do that as well and to see it > demonstrated in Six and Seven. > > There's some hint that Voldemort has that talent, but we haven't > seen him exercise it -- he's always characterizing the people > he's charmed into helping him as naive and gullible. But this is > self-serving -- naturally he doesn't want his current audience to > think that people as clever as themselves could be hoodwinked. > > We don't even know if Ginny, Dippet, and Quirrell were as easy to > mislead as he claims. Pippin and I agree on, ummm, probably the first thing in a while. What's really scary to me about Voldemort is the way that he apparently was able to get a fairly wide amount of popular support for his ideals, even if this support fell off later because of his actions. That's what sparked me to try to look at it in terms of fascism. What I'd go back and add to that essay iffn'when I get the time to rework it is the reminder that fascism can be a terribly attractive thing, especially to the putative beneficiaries of its social changes. What JKR hasn't really succeeded in showing us yet is a Voldemort-as- Voldemort who can be charming in this way. She did so very well with Tom, which is why Diary!Tom is so scary--charming, smooth, and amoral. And we may not *see* this direct side of Voldemort, as she's said we'll see less of him and more of his henchmen, as that's how he likes to work. Now, of course, if Pippin is right, the tragic denoument of ESE!Lupin will show us all, with full doses of pity and tragic recognition (and, one hopes, the break against the open portrayal of violence on the stage :), what Voldemort can do to a weak but originally well- intentioned soul, on the personal level. Right now, Voldemort seems to me so much more like an intensification of the ideological nastiness of wizarding society than something radically new/different/shocking/separate from it, he's simultaneously very scary (as the rise of fascist states is, when you study how they ascend and what they do along the way) but lacking that personal edge/characterization of a truly great literary villain. Where's Hagen when you need him? -Nora watches the sun set entirely too early in the afternoon From hautbois1 at comcast.net Wed Nov 10 21:34:05 2004 From: hautbois1 at comcast.net (ohnooboe) Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2004 21:34:05 -0000 Subject: The Riddles' Murders (WAS: The only one he ever feared? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117554 This is WELL off the beaten path for this post, but I thought I'd put it out there... Big ol' snip... Kim said: Dumbledore's the "greatest wizard in the world" according to the > opinion of many (myself included ;o)), but his behavior is so > inexplicable at times. Maybe he's getting too old (such as in the > way Harry describes him at the end of OotP) and that advanced age > affects his behavior, but 50 years ago when young TR killed his > father and grandparents, DD was still a youthful 100, wasn't he? It seems that many people have this opinion, but I find myself wondering if the issue isn't that Dumbledore is "loosing it", as it were, but rather he is has so much more life experience then any of us would, and he is so magically advanced that we can't really understand what he is thinking. While, I do agree he has his "senior" moments (and he's pointed this out as well, OotP) perhaps his methods and thought processes are too far beyond what we can comprehend with our (or their, in the WW) current knowledge/experiences. Any thoughts... Patrick...who doesn't think DD's as eccentric as I once thought... From foxmoth at qnet.com Wed Nov 10 21:39:33 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2004 21:39:33 -0000 Subject: The dragon memory (Was: Dursleys abuse) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117555 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" wrote: > > Pippin wrote: > > > > > > We've heard about a few upsetting incidents, but we also know, from the occlumency lessons, that Harry has forgotten quite a bit about his childhood, including, apparently, an incident with a dragon. > > Carol responds: > I think I know the memory you're referring to--it's in the same clump of memories as Cedric's death. I saw it as referring to his recentencounter with a dragon in the TWT. Any reason why you see it differently?< Pippin: It's not an original observation of mine, and I can't remember who deserves the credit, but all the other clumps of memories seem to be in chronological order. However, the great black dragon rearing in front of him appears before seeing his mother and father waving to him out of the mirror. If it's the horntail from the TWT, it's misplaced. Carol: > (I also saw no reason to think that he had "forgotten"any of the memories that were revealed in the Occlumency lessons. None of them occurred before he was about five years old and most related to the Dursleys.) Can you explain your thinking for me?< Pippin: "He had just been forced, yet again, to relive a stream of very early memories he had not even realized he still had, most of them concerning humiliations Dudley and his gang had inflicted on him in primary school." --OOP 26 Harry would have to have been five or older in those memories, which he doesn't realize he has. Pippin From beatnik24601 at yahoo.com Wed Nov 10 22:30:07 2004 From: beatnik24601 at yahoo.com (beatnik24601) Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2004 22:30:07 -0000 Subject: Life Debts, origin of phrase In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117556 snipped from Dungrollin's post: The phrase 'life debt' doesn't occur in canon anywhere, but it's a less cumbersome way of describing this bond (coined by whom?)... To which i say: I don't know who first used the phrase here, it's definitely not in HP canon, but it most definitely is in Star Wars canon (episode 1, Jar Jar Binks owes Quigon Gin a 'life debt'), so maybe George Lucas coined the phrase? Beatnik sorry about this not having any real relevance to anything, but I couldn't resist a chance to mention Star Wars From ginnysthe1 at yahoo.com Wed Nov 10 22:41:34 2004 From: ginnysthe1 at yahoo.com (ginnysthe1) Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2004 22:41:34 -0000 Subject: Bad guys and black hats (was Re: Unreliable narrator) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117557 Hi, Kim here. I wasn't in on this discussion from the beginning, but anyhow here's my two cents: Pippin wrote: > Villains in children's books and movies often don't have backstories at all, so even a conventional backstory is an innovation. But JKR may not be talking just about Voldemort's backstory. The interesting thing about the quote to me is that she first says she doesn't want to present him as a typical black hat, but then invokes Hitler, who, in fiction, is often made into a typical black hat -- not only evil, but a metaphor for evil.< [[Here's the quote again: JK: ... With Voldemort, I didn't want to create this cardboard cutout of a baddie, where you put a black hat on him and you say 'Right, now you shoot at that guy because he's bad.' E: Like the Dursleys are more of a cutout bad people? JK: Yes and no. You will meet Dursleys, in Britain. You will. I've barely exaggerated them. Yeah, Voldemort. In the second book, Chamber of Secrets, in fact he's exactly what I've said before. He takes what he perceives to be a defect in himself, in other words the non-purity of his blood, and he projects it onto others. It's like Hitler and the Arian ideal, to which he did not conform at all himself. And so Voldemort is doing this also. He takes his own inferiority, and turns it back on other people and attempts to exterminate in them what he hates in himself.]] Pippin continued: >But one of the scarier things about the historical Hitler gets lost when that happens [i.e. presenting Hitler as a typical black hat]. He was able to persuade shrewd, sophisticated people who had noble ideals and a sense of decency to support him. If Voldemort is a Hitler-style villain, I'd expect him to be able to do that as well and to see it demonstrated in Six and Seven.< >There's some hint that Voldemort has that talent, but we haven't seen him exercise it -- he's always characterizing the people he's charmed into helping him as naive and gullible. But this is self- serving -- naturally he doesn't want his current audience to think that people as clever as themselves could be hoodwinked. ... We don't even know if Ginny, Dippet, and Quirrell were as easy to mislead as he claims.< Kim now: I agree with Pippin. Voldemort's backstory makes him much more than a cardboard cutout villain. He'd be far less interesting without it. Maybe the lack of backstories for other villains in literature, children's as well as adult, is what makes them seem like "conventional black hats" in the first place (so it's hard for me to see how that would ever work for a ficttonal version of Hitler). In my opinion, making any villain "conventional" would be a kind of disservice to the character as well as to the reader, and especially to children who may learn to believe at an early age that life can be divided into "black and white" when life is usually gray, even including situations in which evil seems to have prevailed. Of course if a character is just being used as a metaphor for evil, then I guess it makes sense to leave out the character's backstory, but that wouldn't work in books as grounded in history (WW history, that is) as the Harry Potter series IMO. Then again I'm something of a history fan anyway and think even a cardboard cutout has a backstory (i.e. an origin) too... ;o) As to Voldemort using his talent for persuasion, that may fail him somewhat this time around, now that he's come back to life after having been defeated 16 or so years ago. I don't think even the DEs view him in exactly the same way they once did (but I could be wrong). They saw him fail once before and may not be able to put full faith in him again, though this doesn't seem to apply to the likes of Bellatrix and Barty Crouch Jr. And this time LV will have to recruit DEs from the new generation too, and I wonder if he'll be quite as successful doing that as he was during his first reign of terror. But who am I kidding, bullies have succeeded in recruiting followers from time immemorial... And there is that big obvious difference between LV's first reign of terror and his current one: now the (almost) grown-up Harry Potter has entered into the equation. Cheers, Kim From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Wed Nov 10 23:16:14 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2004 23:16:14 -0000 Subject: Every Tom, Dick and Harry... & Prince (partly OT) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117558 bboyminn wrote: > So, theoretically, there could be, somewhere in that vast expanse of > UK related European royalty, a wizard or two. > > Also, keep in mind that it is not just the son of a King who is a > prince, but the son of a prince. Prince Will & Prince Harry are the > sons of Prince Charles. One would also assume that sons of a princess are also Princes. Carol: Since the women are behind the men in the line of succession (Princess Anne's three brothers and their children, male and female, are all ahead of her even though all but Prince Charles are younger than she is), the sons of a princess are not princes, at least not in England. For the record, Princess Anne's children are Peter and Zara Phillips. The children of the late Princess Margaret, Queen Elizabeth's sister, are Viscount Linley and Lady Sarah. Why Princess Margaret's children are titled (minor) nobility and Princess Anne's are "commoners" despite their royal blood, I'm not sure. It may be because Margaret was the daughter of a ruling king and the Queen Mother whereas Anne was the daughter of a ruling queen and her consort, the Duke of Edinburgh. (I know he's called Prince Philip, but he's not the son of an English king or queen.) Or maybe it's because Princess Anne's first husband, Captain Mark Phillips, was a "commoner." The daughters of a prince, OTOH, are princesses. Prince Andrew's children are Princess Beatrice and Princess Eugenie despite the fact that their mother ("Fergie") was a "commoner" before she became Duchess of York. Anyway, to bring this post at least close to the topic so it won't be burned off the tapestry by the List Elves, the children of the two princesses (all of them adults now and some of them close to fifty, IIRC) could be considered "half-bloods" (half blueblood, half "commoner") but none of them have the title "prince" and two are female. Prince Charles's sons, Prince William and Prince Harry, would be "purebloods" because their mother was minor nobility. (The available brides with a larger amount of the "blood royal," that is, European royalty, were a scarce commodity.) Prince Edward, the childless youngest son of Elizabeth II, could by a stretch of the imagination be Prince Dick since his full name is Edward Antony *Richard* Louis, but of course he's not a "half-blood." The only actual "Dick" in the royal family (not that he uses the nickname, to my knowledge), is HRH Prince Richard Duke of Gloucester, whose father was Prince Henry, younger brother of Queen Elizabeth's father, King George V, and patron of the Richard III Society. He was born in 1944 (not too old to be a Hogwarts instructor given the long lives of wizards), but he's not a "half-blood," either. Here's a link to the order of succession if anyone wants it. http://www.debretts.co.uk/royal_connections/royal_family.html Carol, with apologies for pushing the limits of, erm, on-topicness From ginnysthe1 at yahoo.com Wed Nov 10 23:22:00 2004 From: ginnysthe1 at yahoo.com (ginnysthe1) Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2004 23:22:00 -0000 Subject: The Riddles' Murders (WAS: The only one he ever feared? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117559 Kim wrote: > ... monitoring practices must have changed after the first Vold War (whoever thought that phrase up deserves a gold star!) but they sure aren't up to snuff even now. Voldemort's emissary Quirrell had a pretty easy time getting a job at Hogwarts - haven't they heard of background checks? < Cathy responded: > For some reason, many people keep overlooking the fact that Quirrell was already a teacher at Hogwarts *before* he met Voldemort. He took a year off for *practical* experience, and was quivering Quirrell when he returned. (This is all mentioned early on in PS/SS, after Harry meets Professor Quirrell at the Leaky Cauldron when Hagrid takes him to London to buy his school supplies). We also find out later that Quirrell had returned with Voldemort, and that Voldemort decided to "share" Quirrell's body after blowing stealing the stone from the vault (due to the fact that Hagrid had just removed it), so he could keep a closer eye on him.< > Sorry I don't have the exact reference, of course I'm at work and the books are at home. However, I see this same type of reply so often I had to say something. The quote from Hagrid was something to the effect of "afraid of his own shadow, afraid of his own subject."< Kim now: Cathy, thanks for that reminder! I've even read SS a couple of times too (though it didn't make the same impression on me as the later books). My brain can be a sieve for some of the details if I haven't checked them before I write a post. But even in light of the facts you pointed out, with Quirrell returning as a DADA teacher who's now scared of his own shadow (but faking it, mind you), don't you think it would have made sense to interview him to find out what happened to make him so jumpy and whether he's even up to the job anymore? (or did they? -- I'd better go back and re-read that part of the book) Of course, he'd have lied about it, but can't Dumbledore tell a liar when he sees one? I do realize it's supposed to be hard to find DADA teachers, so shear desperation may be the only explanation for letting Quirrell have the post again. I mean, that explains Lockhart getting the job (well, kind of)! Another thing (that someone else probably pointed out already) is that the DADA teachers all seem to turn out to be Dark Arts Defense lessons in themselves, far more so than the defense skills they try to pass on in class. Not sure if Dumbledore intends this to happen or not. In any case, I still think the WW is pretty lax about security, considering what LV put them through before, but then it's not a perfect world either, is it? Again, a perfect world would be dull, dull, dull. Cheers, Kim From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Wed Nov 10 23:25:38 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2004 23:25:38 -0000 Subject: Kreacher's bandages Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117560 Has anyone noticed that Kreacher's hands are bandaged as if he has just ironed them when Harry tries to contact Sirius Black using Umbridge's fireplace (OoP Am. ed. 740)? Has he ironed them in advance because he's in the process of betraying his master or because he has just injured Buckbeak or . . . ? Ideas, anybody? Carol From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Thu Nov 11 00:15:36 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 00:15:36 -0000 Subject: DD's respect for Snape (Was: Unreliable narrator - The Snape Timeline In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117561 Alla wrote: > If we are talking about Dumbledore's trust in GENERAL, I liked > Flinwitch's post which argued that despite the fact that Dumbledore > keeps repeating that he trusts Snape, NOWHERE in the books did he say that he LIKES Snape or he SUPPORTS Snape, or that Harry needs to > given him ANY kind of respect, other then calling him Professor. > Carol responds: It seems to me that Dumbledore treats Snape with something like fatherly affection, for example pulling a cracker with him at Christmas (which unfortunately turned out to contain a vulture hat). Even when he reprimands Snape, he's usually firm but gentle. Dumbledore says to Harry regarding Kreacher, who by all accounts is demented and evil with few or no good qualities left in him, "I warned Sirius . . . that Kreacher must be treated with kindness and respect" (832). Surely Dumbledore would apply a similar philosophy to Professor Snape, whose loyalty he does not question? And I would argue that Dumbledore's repeated defense of Snape's actions in the next-to-last chapter of OoP is respectful throughout. For example, when Harry unreasonably accuses Snape of "sneer[ing] at me as usual" when Harry told him about Voldemort, DD says: "Harry, you know that Professor Snape had no choice but to pretend not to take you seriously in front of Delores Umbridge, bu as I have explained, he informed the Order as soon as possible about what you had said. It was he who deduced where you had gone when you did not return from the forest. It was he too who gave Professor Umbridge fake veritaserum when she was attempting to force you to tell of Sirius's whereabouts" (833). This passage strikes me as a wholly respectful defense of Snape. It even includes a bit of extra information not directly related to the MoM incident showing that Snape, like Harry, is an enemy of Delores Umbridge. I see no disrespect for Snape by Dumbledore in this passage or anywhere in the books. DD treats Snape exactly as he treats McGonagall in GoF; it's no accident that they appear side by side behind Dumbledore as they enter Crouch!Moody's office. (Their reactions, too, are almost identical; both stop dead in the doorway. And note that both are reflected, with Dumbledore, in the Foe Glass, surely as good a bit of evidence as we'll find that Snape really is on DD's side against LV and the DE's). And there is that moment in GoF when DD makes Snape and Black shake hands because "it is time for two of our number to recognize each other for what they are." He is treating Severus Snape exactly as he is treating Sirius Black, and he is viewing both of them as needed members of his team. I could cite other examples of his fatherly attitude toward Snape; they're everywhere. Dumbledore preaches kindness and respect for House Elves, and he follows that same philosophy in the treatment of his employees. And Snape, besides being worthy of respect for the depth of his knowledge in his field, is in a position of trust, watching the hallways at night, aiding Dumbledore when he is in need, always at Dumbledore's side in a crisis. That trust, IMO, is not violated by his actions in OoP. In fact, it is reinforced, as the quoted passage and others like it show, by his role in bringing the Order to the MoM. "I trust Severus Snape" implies respect as well as trust. BTW, I hope at some point to come back to Neri's timeline with what I think Snape must have been doing during that time (although I don't see how even Harry's portion of the adventure could have taken from dusk to dawn), but I won't deal with that here. Carol, who really is trying to get to more recent posts but couldn't pass this one by From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Thu Nov 11 00:37:04 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 00:37:04 -0000 Subject: Harry's moral core vs. Voldie's In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117562 Kelsey wrote : > And we don't know the > circumstances of the death of Tom's Slytherin-heir mother (who fell in love with a Muggle). [insert outrageous theory about her sacrificial death here]. I think that, deep in the psyche of these two children, the abandonment issues are _about_ equal." > > Del replied: > Not necessarily. Harry was loved during 15 months. Tom might not have been. This could be enough to create a major difference between the two. > Carol notes: We know that she lived just long enough to give Tom a name. To all intents and purposes, she died in childbirth. That, I suppose, is a kind of sacrifice--she gave her life for his--but it wasn't a deliberate action, a choice, as Lily's sacrifice was. (Or Mrs. Crouch's, for that matter.) Mrs. Riddle making the effort as she's dying to name her son after his father and her own strikes me as an act of love not only for the infant but for the two men involved. Sad that one of them was the wretch who abandoned his pregnant wife, and unfortunate that Tom could have no memory of that loving moment. Carol, hoping the mothers on the list will understand the significance of such a moment From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Thu Nov 11 01:02:42 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 01:02:42 -0000 Subject: Harry's moral core vs. Voldie's In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117563 Carol wrote : " Mrs. Riddle making the effort as she's dying to name her son after his father and her own strikes me as an act of love not only for the infant but for the two men involved. (snip) Carol, hoping the mothers on the list will understand the significance of such a moment" Del replies : If you're right, then it's downright tragically ironic that Tom Jr came to hate and despise that name ! An act of love turned into a seed of hate... Del, who is a mother and was indeed moved by Carol's explanation From kelly at protocallonline.com Thu Nov 11 01:21:06 2004 From: kelly at protocallonline.com (kellymcj2000) Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 01:21:06 -0000 Subject: Brain room In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117564 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "ginnysthe1" wrote: > > Thought I'd throw out a potentially nonsensical question (from the > long list generated by recently re-reading the last chapters of OotP): > > You know that Brain Room in the Dept. of Mysteries? Whose brains did > they used to be? Do you think it matters? > > Kim, who can't seem to get those brains out of her brain, which > points to the possibility that there's lots of empty room in > there... ;-) Great question; never thought about that, but I got the impression they were 'angry' brains. Maybe they take the brains of evil witches and wizards and put them in this solution to revive the brains. Then they can try to decipher the mind of a madman! Or madwoman. Not the same as being alive of course. We know no magic can do that. kmc From stbjohn2 at yahoo.com Wed Nov 10 17:13:11 2004 From: stbjohn2 at yahoo.com (stbjohn2) Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2004 17:13:11 -0000 Subject: Life Debts was Why has DD never suggested Snape thank Harry In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117565 Potioncat: > > I can't find the cannon where I hide my copy of SS/PS, so I can't > > quote it. But DD says something along the line of 'having a > > strange idea that he owes your father a debt for saving his life.' > > Harry and almost all of us have taken that bit of conversation and > > worked out an elaborate idea of how and when Life Debts are > > formed. But I don't think they exist at all. Dungrollin: > > I don't have my books with me, either, but the main canon in support > of the idea is at the end of PoA, when DD's explaining that saving > Pettigrew's life wasn't such a bad thing. He says something along > the lines of 'When one wizard saves another wizards life, a certain > bond is formed.' And then later 'This is magic at its deepest and > most mysterious.' And some stuff about Voldy not being too pleased > that one of his servants owes Harry a debt. (Was it 'a debt'? > Or 'his life'? Was it 'a certain bond' or 'a deep magical bond'?) > Here's the quote (p427 u.s. pb) "Pettigrew owes his life to you. You have sent Voldemort a deputy who is in your debt ... When one wizard saves another wizard's life, it creates a certain bond between them... and I'm much mistaken if Voldemort wants his servant in the debt of Harry Potter." (that's DD speaking, and elipses are in original.) Sandy From figgys26cats at yahoo.com Thu Nov 11 00:59:05 2004 From: figgys26cats at yahoo.com (Kathleen Hunt) Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2004 16:59:05 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Apparition lessons (was Re: Draco's POV?) In-Reply-To: <20041108002258.74333.qmail@web53101.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041111005905.96457.qmail@web51706.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 117566 > Andrea: > > One thing I've wondered is how students about to > > come of age learn to apparate. > > catkind: > Also, all the students will be turning 17 at > different points in the year, so when would > the lessons start? Juli now: Maybe there are classes at the beginning of their 6th or 7th year at Hogwarts, depending on when they turn 17, I think it may be just like broom-flying lessons thay had a few at their first year and that's it. Maybe Mme Hooch is the teacher, cause I don't see her doing much during the school year. How can they have apparating lesson, when no one inside of Hogwarts can apperate or diapperate? Haven't you read the Hogwarts History book yet? Oops, sorry only Hermione has read it. "figgys26cats" From jeanette_oliver at sbcglobal.net Wed Nov 10 21:12:38 2004 From: jeanette_oliver at sbcglobal.net (oliver_jeanette) Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2004 21:12:38 -0000 Subject: Life Debts was Why has DD never suggested Snape thank Harry In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117567 Hello! I'm new to this group so please have patience with me... > Potioncat: > I think, but I don't remember who I stole this idea from (oblivate > seems to have worked poorly and backward at that) that there is no > such thing as a Life Debt. > > I can't find the cannon where I hide my copy of SS/PS, so I can't > quote it. But DD says something along the line of 'having a strange > idea that he owes your father a debt for saving his life.' Harry and > almost all of us have taken that bit of conversation and worked out > an elaborate idea of how and when Life Debts are formed. But I > don't think they exist at all. Just my opinion... I don't think Snape truly feels like he owes his life to James Potter. He did tell Harry that James only stopped him from going to the Shrieking Shack that night to cover himself and Sirius. Snape seems to feel that James did this out of guilt for a practical joke that probably would have cost a life. Basically, in Snape's mind, James had a burst of conscience and it was about time. Had their roles been reversed, would Snape have done the same for James.....maybe not and maybe that's why Snape can't let go of the hate. I believe that his real debt is to Dumbledore. He was a DE and Dumbledore gave him a second chance. I really hope in books 6 and 7 that we get to learn more about that. Snape knows about the prophecy and he knows what Harry must do. Yes, he vents his feelings toward James on Harry, but he's also helping DD to protect Harry because it's for the greater good. He just hates the fact that Harry happens to be James Potter's son. From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Thu Nov 11 01:36:32 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 01:36:32 -0000 Subject: The only one he ever feared? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117568 Kneasy wrote: At the beginning of OoP there's talk of a 'weapon'. So what is it and > where is it? Some of us write about Weapon!Harry, but it wasn't Harry > the Order was guarding, it was something in the Dept. of Mysteries. > Why waste manpower on a grotty old globe that won't help Voldy > in the slightest and can't even be taken off the shelf by anyone except Voldy or Harry? No reason to at all - unless someone wants to convince someone else that it's important. Carol responds: IIRC, the term "weapon" was used by Lupin and Black to derail Harry, giving LV something plausible to be seeking that didn't give away the real object of his quest. That was badly phrased, I know. I mean, they didn't want Harry to know that LV was seeking a prophecy that related to him because of course Harry would ask questions that they either couldn't or didn't want to answer. And calling the Prophecy a "weapon" wasn't a lie, exactly, since LV did intend to use it against Harry and clear the way for destroying or controlling everybody else. As for "wasting manpower guarding a grotty old globe," yes, of course, they were trying to make it look important. The longer they could keep LV focused on the Prophecy, the more time their side would have to prepare for the coming war. Stave off the main onslaught as long as possible with a diversionary tactic. Kneasy: > Of course, I've got a vested interest in this sort of thing; convoluted plotting, dirty work at the cross-roads, sneaky stuff. Plus wondering if it's the globe-like bubbles from Droobles Gum that Agnes is trying to bring to mind and communicate to Neville. Then there's the silvery orb that is Lupin's Boggart. Is it the moon? Or a globe? Ah! Paranoia can be so much fun! Carol responds: Well, Lavender (or Parvati?) thought it was a crystal ball, and Lupin does seem to be afraid of having his fortune read! And, erm, I think you mean Alice (Longbottom). Agnes is the dog-faced woman whose son visits her at Christmas. (At one time we speculated that the son might be Snape. Wouldn't that be fun--an encounter between Snape and Neville as they visit their respective mothers in St. Mungo's at Christmas. Especially if Agnes, too, turns out to be a victim of the Death Eaters!) Carol, who is not a conspiracy theorist and is only having fun From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Thu Nov 11 01:55:43 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 01:55:43 -0000 Subject: Muggle World (Was: Quills) In-Reply-To: <20041106015733.10816.qmail@web53108.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117569 Juli wrote: > > Besides, I don't think the robes are anything like a > judge's, in GoF Fleur says she won't be able to fit in > her gown, which means they aren't so wide as to make > you feel like a nun, they must have some shape. Carol responds: True, but she's talking about dress robes, the WW equivalent of an evening gown if you're female. School uniforms are probably another matter altogether, unisex but medieval. I still think the closest equivalent is the academic gowns worn by students at Oxford--not the modern version but the one that was worn from the thirteenth through the nineteenth centuries to distinguish the students (and faculty) from the ordinary townspeople--Town and Gown. Carol From jferer at yahoo.com Thu Nov 11 02:01:51 2004 From: jferer at yahoo.com (Jim Ferer) Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 02:01:51 -0000 Subject: Apparition lessons (was Re: Draco's POV?) In-Reply-To: <20041111005905.96457.qmail@web51706.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117570 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Kathleen Hunt wrote: > > > Andrea: > > > One thing I've wondered is how students about to > > > come of age learn to apparate. > > > > catkind: > > Also, all the students will be turning 17 at > > different points in the year, so when would > > the lessons start? > > > Juli now: Maybe there are classes at the beginning of > their 6th or 7th year at Hogwarts, depending on when > they turn 17, I think it may be just like broom-flying > lessons thay had a few at their first year and that's > it. Maybe Mme Hooch is the teacher, cause I don't see > her doing much during the school year. > > >> "figgys26cats" > How can they have apparating lesson, when no one inside of Hogwarts can apperate or diapperate? Haven't you read the Hogwarts History book yet? Oops, sorry only Hermione has read it. Madame Hooch: "Is everyone here? Very well, we'll be walking down to Hogsmeade so that we can practice Apparating and Disapparating, but before we begin, understand that those of you under the age of 17 are not permitted to do it on your own before you are 17 years old and have passed the official Ministry test." Jim Ferer From annemehr at yahoo.com Thu Nov 11 02:03:50 2004 From: annemehr at yahoo.com (annemehr) Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 02:03:50 -0000 Subject: Inside Harry's mind In-Reply-To: <9EE44AEE-3323-11D9-A88D-000A9577CB94@btconnect.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117571 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Barry Arrowsmith wrote: > No longer the well-meaning, slightly dim, ready to jump to the wrong > conclusion for the right reasons Harry, but a progression to a stroppy, > irritable, bad-tempered, disobedient and thoroughly awkward customer > ready to be misled by outside influences - even after he'd been warned > of the possibility. Why the change? The events in the graveyard, of > course. Any restraint the Lily Protection had on the Voldy!Fragment has > now gone and it's effect is beginning to show. DD is worried about it > too - "But in essence divided?" A question, note; not a statement. > After Harry has his Arthur dream DD is worried that Harry is quite > literally not himself. Annemehr: Oooooooh. Never even thought of that before, the Lily-protection-thing keeping Harry's inner Voldy in check. In CoS, it almost seems that Dumbledore views Harry carrying a bit of LV around an advantage, doesn't it? "Not something he meant to do." But after GoF, he's afraid of it. Puts a new spin on the Occlumency lessons, too. If LV is putting thoughts into Harry's head, is he really doing it *through* Harry's bit of him? That would negate any considerations of distance between their physical bodies; LV now has a permanent proximity to him and something much, much more intimate than mere eye contact. It gets LV behind all the Hogwarts defenses in a way, as well. But on Harry's side, he's very stubborn. Determined. Strong-willed. I think that quality is all Harry's. So he'll put up quite a fight. *rubs hands together in anticipation* Annemehr From ginnysthe1 at yahoo.com Thu Nov 11 02:04:08 2004 From: ginnysthe1 at yahoo.com (ginnysthe1) Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 02:04:08 -0000 Subject: The Riddles' Murders (WAS: The only one he ever feared? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117572 Kim's snipped post: >Dumbledore's the "greatest wizard in the world" according to the opinion of many (myself included ;o)), but his behavior is so inexplicable at times. Maybe he's getting too old (such as in the way Harry describes him at the end of OotP) and that advanced age affects his behavior, but 50 years ago when young TR killed his father and grandparents, DD was still a youthful 100, wasn't he?< To which Patrick replied: >It seems that many people have this opinion, but I find myself wondering if the issue isn't that Dumbledore is "loosing it", as it were, but rather he has so much more life experience then any of us would, and he is so magically advanced that we can't really understand what he is thinking. While, I do agree he has his "senior" moments (and he's pointed this out as well, OotP) perhaps his methods and thought processes are too far beyond what we can comprehend with our (or their, in the WW) current knowledge/experiences. Any thoughts... [signed] Patrick...who doesn't think DD's as eccentric as I once thought...< Kim asks Patrick: What did you think of the rest of my post insofar as it might relate to your view of DD's life experience and magically advanced state of mind (which you could easily be right about)? Here's the rest of what I'd written: "... So what guided [DD's] decision to keep it to himself if he did indeed suspect the student Tom Riddle of killing 3 Muggles in Little Hangleton? Sometimes DD reminds me of Emperor Claudius (in the PBS/BBC series "I, Claudius") ... when he said, "Let all the poisons that lurk in the mud hatch out..." And: "But also this reminds me [of] the possibility of DD having heard a prophecy about the birth of Tom Riddle/Lord Voldemort years ago, in the same way that he'd been the one to hear the prophecy about the coming of the vanquisher of Voldemort. Maybe he thought he couldn't interfere in the unfolding of that earlier prophecy either." I think I was sort of getting at part of what you're saying about Dumbledore when I compared him to Claudius. I think Claudius too had seen so much in his lifetime that when chaos descended once again, the wisdom of his years told him to just let the chips fall where they may this time. Besides he was too old and sick to do anything about it by then anyway. Of course Dumbledore is Dumbledore, not Claudius and he's still far more powerful a wizard than Claudius was a man at that time in his life. And what do you think about the prophecy idea (which of course is pure conjecture at this point)? I agree though that there's more to Dumbledore than anyone can truly appreciate. There are so many things we don't know about him and may never know. Where was he born, where did he grow up, who was his family? What other experiences did he have in his long life besides the references we've heard to his defeat of Grindelwald and his relationship with Nicholas Flamel? Kim (who'd like to read all the books again focusing only on her favorite characters so she could get to know them all as well as possible) From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Thu Nov 11 02:40:14 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 02:40:14 -0000 Subject: Harry, Hermione, Sirius, and the Dream, 2-way mirror In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117573 Pippin wrote: I thought it was odd that Sirius didn't ask Harry why he didn't use the mirror instead when Harry got him on Umbridge's fire. Did he not want Remus to know that Harry had it? > Tim responded: Very odd indeed! Sirius' and Harry's behavior in this book drive me up the wall. Why didn't Sirius give Harry the mirror earlier and demostrate its use while both were at 12 Gimmauld Place? Why did Harry think the mirror was so dangerous to Sirius? I know the phrasing Sirius used, but still why did Harry take him so literally and seriously? Why didn't Sirius say to Harry, "Use my gift"? in Umbridge's fire? Carol adds: I think you're both right that Sirius didn't want Remus to know what he was doing. Notice how furtively he gives Harry the mirror. He beckons Harry to his side and thrusts a badly wrapped package into his hands. Then he tells Harry something he certainly doesn't want Lupin to hear, that the package is "a way of letting [him] know if Snape is giving [Harry] a bad time"! (OoP Am. ed. 523). Not only is Sirius undermining the Occlumency lessons by making it look as if Snape is out to hurt Harry rather than help him. Then he tells Harry, "Don't open it in here! I don't think Molly would approve" (523). Most likely Lupin wouldn't approve, either. Maybe he would agree with Harry that using the "whatever it was" to complain about Snape would "lure Sirius out of his hiding place" (523). The irony is, of course, that refusing to use Sirius's gift led Harry to forget about it, so that it was indeed he who unwittingly "lured" Sirius out of his hiding place. While the mirror itself was rightfully Harry's and probably should have been given to him at some point, both the *way* in which the mirror was given and the reasons for the gift were neither sensible nor admirable. Much better to have given it as a Christmas gift in front of Lupin and Molly, with no mention of Snape. Carol From ginnysthe1 at yahoo.com Thu Nov 11 02:50:07 2004 From: ginnysthe1 at yahoo.com (ginnysthe1) Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 02:50:07 -0000 Subject: Harry's moral core vs. Voldie's In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117574 Kelsey wrote: > And we don't know the circumstances of the death of Tom's Slytherin-heir mother (who fell in love with a Muggle). [insert outrageous theory about her sacrificial death here]. I think that, deep in the psyche of these two children, the abandonment issues are _about_ equal."< Del replied: > Not necessarily. Harry was loved during 15 months. Tom might not have been. This could be enough to create a major difference between the two.< Carol notes: > We know that she lived just long enough to give Tom a name. To all intents and purposes, she died in childbirth. That, I suppose, is a kind of sacrifice--she gave her life for his--but it wasn't a deliberate action, a choice, as Lily's sacrifice was. (Or Mrs. Crouch's, for that matter.) Mrs. Riddle making the effort as she's dying to name her son after his father and her own strikes me as an act of love not only for the infant but for the two men involved. Sad that one of them was the wretch who abandoned his pregnant wife, and unfortunate that Tom could have no memory of that loving moment.< Kim commenting now: I agree with Del, that Harry was greatly loved by both his parents, though even for such a short time. Not only that, IMO his parents loved each other too and exposed Harry to that love also for that short time. We know so little about Tom Riddle's birth circumstances that's it's hard to say anything more specific about it than what Tom said himself. However, I've been constructing a history of Tom Riddle's parents and of Tom's early childhood these last few days, so see what y'all (now that really gives my region of the US away!) think of a few tidbits, if you dare... Firstly, I don't think it's certain that Tom Riddle's mother was the one who named her son, as Carol suggests. She may have died before she could do that, she may not have known he would be a boy (although she could have picked out a boy's and a girl's name ahead of time, just in case). Maybe it was the birth attendant, the midwife, or someone else who named him after his father (which would mean they had to know who the father was). I admit it's all maybe. Secondly, I'm not sure Tom Riddle (LV's father) necessarily knew that his wife was pregnant when he left her. We know that he left her when he learned she was a witch. (And who told him this? Maybe she did, maybe she didn't). She could have known she was pregnant and not told her husband this, but told him she was a witch first, and then he left her, never knowing that she *was* pregnant. Maybe his fatal encounter with Tom Ridddle (son) years later in the Little Hangleton House was the first he knew that he had a son. Thirdly, there are all kinds of questions about the relationship Tom Riddle's father and mother had with one another (and I think this was probably discussed in previous posts that I should look up in the archives if only I knew how!) before Tom Riddle the son was conceived. How and why did Mrs. Riddle keep her witch status a secret from her boyfriend and then husband? Did she know he disliked wizards when she got involved with him, or did he say that his family disliked wizards, but that he might have been more tolerant? Did her family dislike Muggles as much as his family disliked wizards? Or maybe it was only he, not necessarliy his family, who disliked wizards, but the young witch was so in love (or lust) with him that she lied by omission about who she was? Anyhow, that's all for now. If there's any interest, I can keep going on another post. Til later, Kim From elsyee_h at yahoo.com Thu Nov 11 02:53:51 2004 From: elsyee_h at yahoo.com (Tammy) Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 02:53:51 -0000 Subject: Kreacher's bandages In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117575 Carol wrote: > Has anyone noticed that Kreacher's hands are bandaged as if he has > just ironed them when Harry tries to contact Sirius Black using > Umbridge's fireplace (OoP Am. ed. 740)? Has he ironed them in advance > because he's in the process of betraying his master or because he has > just injured Buckbeak or . . . ? > > Ideas, anybody? > Tammy replies: Well, as Kreacher had already betrayed his master by going to Narcissa to begin with back at Christmas and hadn't punished himself (at least not visibily), I presume the injuries are due to Buckbeak. In addition, one could argue that Kreacher saw his first duty to protect the Black family, and Sirius was most definitely so far apart from the rest of the Blacks that Kreacher could act against him with little consequence. Also as DD pointed out, Kreacher hadn't really acted against Sirius, he had obeyed him by literally taking the "get out" to be an order. And Kreacher had only supplied information to get Harry into trouble, not Sirius. Sirius was never in danger, so it's possible that it wasn't even a betrayal anyhow. -Tammy, who apologizes for the rambling thoughts. From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Thu Nov 11 03:12:41 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 03:12:41 -0000 Subject: New!TOM - Fight or Rebuild? You be the Judge. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117576 Steve (bboyminn) wrote: > > You make is sound as if the very first thing New!Tom would have done > was go looking for a fight; go looking for Dumbledore, or one of the > teachers. Personally, that sounds extremely unlikely. > > The first thing he would have done is left that castle as soon as > possible. The second thing would have been to re-unite with his old self. The combination of Old!Voldemort and New!Tom would have been a > substantial adversary. You would be combining the exprience of a 70 > year old, well versed in the Dark Arts, with the youthful body and > idealistic mind of 16 year old Tom. > > Assuming they could actually merge themselves into one corporeal > person, I think the new combined Voldie!Tom would have been more > powerful and dangerous than either of them separately, and I think > that is what JKR was referring to when she made the comment about this eventuality hypothetically occuring. Carol responds: Although I think this scenario must be what JKR had in mind in the passage you're referring to on your site, but I have a few problems with it. First, Voldemort, the terrifying wizard who wanted to take over the world, would be stuck in the body of a sixteen-year-old boy. Not even his own followers would recognize him. I suppose that he could prove his identity by causing their Dark Marks to burn and casting a few Crucios, but it would still be difficult to consider him as their near-omnipotent master. He'd have to spend a few years transforming himself into a more awe-inspiring form. There is also no guarantee that the two identities would see it as in their best interest to merge. We might even have rival Voldemorts, Vapormort searching for a body and Voldie!Tom trying to build a powerbase and persuade the DEs that he was the "real" Voldemort. How much would he know about his future self? Would he even know about the Dark Marks? And suppose that he *did* want to merge with his future self. How would he know how to find him? And how would Vapormort know that Voldie!Tom existed? Last he knew, he'd left his diary at Hogwarts or in the care of a friend, but how would he know that Lucius Malfoy had given it to a student, who in turn had loosed the basilisk and given her soul to Diary!Tom? There's no indication that the restored Voldemort in GoF even knew about the diary incident. Granted, the experiment failed, but how would he have known if it succeeded? It's all hypothetical, I realize, but IMO, a victory over Diary!Tom wasn't really a victory over Voldemort, only over the clone of a murderous boy who knew Parseltongue and was capable of casting Unforgiveable Curses without batting an eye, not much different from Barty Jr. except in his devotion to his own cause rather than that of a leader. Carol From eggplant9998 at yahoo.com Wed Nov 10 17:30:58 2004 From: eggplant9998 at yahoo.com (eggplant9998) Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2004 17:30:58 -0000 Subject: Why has DD never suggested Snape thank Harry? (Was: Why has DD never suggested H In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117577 "mommystery2003" wrote: > does Harry, when everything is over and > knowing that Snape was not the total evil > "git" he had been made out to be, thank > him for looking out for him? No, So when do you think it would be a good time to thank Snape? Perhaps Harry should kiss Snape's hand when he was in the hospital and almost died from heroically saving the wizard world, or perhaps he should do it right after Snape called him a lying, strutting, publicity seeking brat. Consider the end of book 5, Harry had saved the would many times and Snape knew that Harry had just lost his beloved Godfather and had suffered the tortures of the dammed, but Snape was so incredibly small that he still sneered at him and took points from Gryffindor. It is hypocritical to thank someone if you don't feel gratitude, and it's easy to see why Harry has none toward Snape. > It wouldn't have cost him much to go > up to the man and thank him. It would cost him my respect for Harry, and his self respect too. I can't think of anything more sniveling, more grotesque or condescending. > So why should Snape go up to Harry > and thank him? For the same reason you say Harry should, because Harry saved Snape's life, and a lot of other people too. > I do think Dumbledore should have > prodded Harry to thank Snape As it is in book 5 Harry very nearly physically attacked Dumbledore, if the Headmaster had done as you suggest I think it might have pushed Harry over the edge; and I can't say I would blame him. > the Harry I have seen throughout > these books is somewhat selfish Are you telling me that if you had saved the world 5 times and as a reward were treated like dirt and suffered so horribly you literally wanted to die you would have behaved more honorably? Eggplant From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Thu Nov 11 03:40:03 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 03:40:03 -0000 Subject: DD's respect for Snape (Was: Unreliable narrator - The Snape Timeline In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117578 > > Carol responds: > It seems to me that Dumbledore treats Snape with something like > fatherly affection, for example pulling a cracker with him at > Christmas (which unfortunately turned out to contain a vulture hat). snip. > Even when he reprimands Snape, he's usually firm but gentle. > I see no disrespect for Snape by Dumbledore in this passage or > anywhere in the books. snip. He is treating > Severus Snape exactly as he is treating Sirius Black, and he is > viewing both of them as needed members of his team. > > I could cite other examples of his fatherly attitude toward Snape; > they're everywhere. Alla: Sorry, Carol, but that was not the argument of the initial post and not mine. I was not challenging the fact that Dumbledore trusts Snape, but to trust the person and to LIKE the person is not the same thing. Dumbledore's trust in Snape is indeed everywhere. He respects him as loyal member of the Light forces. I don't remember any.examples of Dumbledore's "fatherly affection" toward Snape I consider it to bemostly fandom creation. I see that Dumbledore definitely respects Snape (whether this trust and respect is misplaced is remains to be seen, but I will concede that most likely Snape is loyal to Dumbledore and light). I don't see anywhere that Dumbledore LIKES Snape or LOVES him. I would say that he tolerates him at most out of necessity, but that is of course just my speculation. What do you make out of the ending of PoA , for example when Dumbledore rather harshly stops Snape hysterics? ""You don't know Potter!" shrieked Snape. "he did it, I know he did it-" "That will do, Severus," said Dumbledore quietly. "Think about what you are saying. This door had been locked since I left the ward ten minutes ago. Madam Pomfrey, have these students left their beds?" "Of course not!" said Madam Pomfrey, bristling. "I would have heard them!" "Well, there you have it, Severus," said Dumbledore calmly. "Unless you are suggesting that Harry and Hermione are able to be in two places in once, I am afraid I don't see any point in troubling them further" - PoA, p.420, paperback. To me, it looked like rather cruel mockery by Dumbledore, because I think that all teachers know about time-turners, not just McGonagall, so Dumbledore practically tells him what happened and tells him to shut up. Now, of course you can argue that Snape could've not know and Dumbledore told him later about time-turner. In any event, the most what I saw from Dumbledore in that scene is pity towards the man "who is not unbalanced, just suffered a severe dissapointment" Now, I am not saying that Dumbledore can feel the affection towards Snape, but if he does, he hides it well, IMO. From dk59us at yahoo.com Thu Nov 11 03:41:30 2004 From: dk59us at yahoo.com (Eustace_Scrubb) Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 03:41:30 -0000 Subject: hero or Hero? (was Re: Is Harry feeling guilty for being alive?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117579 Alla wrote : > "Funnily enough, usually I don't have much use for them either. But > suprisingly, Harry is not an obvious type of hero for me." > Del replies : > Harry is *not* a Hero for me. He is the story's hero as in "central > character", but he's not a Hero. That's why explanations centered on > "he does it because he's the hero" don't go well with me. > > To me, Harry is a normal person thrown into abnormal circumstances, > just like any kid thrown into a war for example. They are everyday > heroes, if you prefer. Alla wrote : > "You said that one cannot be both Frodo and Legolas. True,but what > do you make of Aragorn? He is a normal person and a hero." > Del replies : > Aragorn is hardly a normal person IMO. He is the one prophesied to > come and he's suspected or known this for most of his life. He was > raised by Elves. He is loved by an Elven princess. And most of all > he's *experienced* : he's not fresh out of innocence. He's had > *decades* to ponder his role in History and to prepare for it. When > duty calls, he stops and reflect before jumping. He *knows* he's a > prophesied hero and he *chooses* to fulfill that role, putting aside > whatever else he might want. Eustace_Scrubb interjects: On the other hand, I see greater parallels between Aragorn and Harry than between Faramir or Eomer and Harry. While I don't recall that there was any pre-birth prophecy about Aragorn's role in the defeat of Sauron, he was the heir of Isildur. But his youth parallels Harry's in that "his true name and lineage were kept secret at the bidding of Elrond." (LOTR, Return of the King, Appendix A) When he was 20, Elrond told him his true name and heritage. In Harry's case, he is not (as far as we know now) the scion of some ancient royal house--although there's always the chance that he's the "heir of Gryffindor" which would change things a bit. But there is that prophecy, which may not have originally referred to him but according to Dumbledore did refer to him as of Voldemort's attack on him. Like Aragorn, Harry knew nothing of this in his youth. He has discovered gradually over the first five books that he is special and at the end of OoP he hears that he is doomed to kill Voldemort or be killed by him. We don't really know yet how like Aragorn he may be. One of the great questions in the Harry Potter series is how Harry will come to grips with the prophecy. He now knows that _he_ is a prophesied hero. The chances are that he _will_ also "choose to fulfill that role, putting aside whatever else he might want." Yet he may try to avoid that fate for a time as well (more like the reluctant Aragorn of the LOTR movies than in the books). We know little about how Aragorn felt about Elrond's revelation. We already know quite a bit about Harry's reaction to the prophecy and we'll undoubtedly learn lots more. What will keep Harry from seeming like the stoic Aragorn accepting his fate is the fact that we see so much of the stories from Harry's point of view (and the fact that the rest of the story occupies about two years rather than 80 or 90!). I'm afraid that Harry's stuck being the Hero of the series, whether he (or I) likes it or not. I don't think he'll end up seeming a _typical_ hero, though. Cheers, Eustace_Scrubb From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Thu Nov 11 03:55:55 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 03:55:55 -0000 Subject: hero or Hero? (was Re: Is Harry feeling guilty for being alive?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117580 > Eustace_Scrubb interjects: > On the other hand, I see greater parallels between Aragorn and Harry > than between Faramir or Eomer and Harry. Alla: Yes, me too, me too, but I have to say - I sympathise with Harry sygnificantly more than I did with Aragorn. It is due to the fact that when I first saw Aragorn he is an adult, who came to terms with his destiny and Harry is a normal (or not exactly normal) child who gets stuck with his Destiny and struggles to accept it right in front of my eyes. Eustac: > In Harry's case, he is not (as far as we know now) the scion of some > ancient royal house--although there's always the chance that he's the > "heir of Gryffindor" which would change things a bit. Alla: I think it is a very strong possibility and don't forget that JKR did tease us that "he may be the heir of Gryffindor" Eustace: > I'm afraid that Harry's stuck being the Hero of the series, whether he > (or I) likes it or not. I don't think he'll end up seeming a > _typical_ hero, though. > Alla: Definitely not typical, but I do hope that JKR won't take away his "{heroic side" completely. > Cheers, > > Eustace_Scrubb From hautbois1 at comcast.net Thu Nov 11 04:14:18 2004 From: hautbois1 at comcast.net (ohnooboe) Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 04:14:18 -0000 Subject: The Riddles' Murders (WAS: The only one he ever feared? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117581 > > Kim asks Patrick: > > What did you think of the rest of my post insofar as it might relate to your view of DD's life experience and magically advanced state of mind (which you could easily be right about)? > > Here's the rest of what I'd written: "... So what guided [DD's] > decision to keep it to himself if he did indeed suspect the student > Tom Riddle of killing 3 Muggles in Little Hangleton? Sometimes DD > reminds me of Emperor Claudius (in the PBS/BBC series "I, > Claudius") ... when he said, "Let all the poisons that lurk in the > mud hatch out..." Good question. Again, I think this is one of those things that we wax philosophic about, but can never truly...well, that's the FUN of philosophy! So...Whatever stopped DD from pursuing TR as the "prime suspect" and taking that to the MoM (or Wizengamut, or whoever) stopped him not only in this instance, but also previously when DD kept "an annoyingly close watch" over TR after the CoS incident (those were roughly TR's words anyway...) This "something", then, stopped him twice from turning in TR. Here is where we could welcome in the old Time Turner theory (which we won't...please...oh dear god please...DD sees what happens and goes back in time to put the pieces in place so that...yeah...) because it puts and explination in a place that we can understand, however, I don't think that's the explination we need. I don't think we're really meant to understand why DD does what he does. It's completely possible, as Kim pointed out, that DD has heard more than one prophesy about the events that lead up to the defeat of LV. Maybe his defeat of Grindelwald also plays into this somehow. These are all possibilities, but I think they are somehow rationalizations for DD's behavior; ways to try and understand what DD does...why would he need a warm pair of socks...his love for Muggle candy...his off-handed displays of power... DD does what he does because in the life of a seemingly omnipresent, well-aged, uberwizard this is the typical modus operandi. The only problem is that he's the ONLY "seemingly omnipresent, well-aged, uberwizard" and therefore comes off as either a bit off his gourd or overly eccentric. Patrick...who lost his train of thought a long time ago and should have stopped while he was ahead... From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Thu Nov 11 04:18:06 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 04:18:06 -0000 Subject: Why has DD never suggested Snape thank Harry? (Was: Why has DD never suggested H In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117582 Eggplant: > So when do you think it would be a good time to thank Snape? Perhaps > Harry should kiss Snape's hand when he was in the hospital and > almost died from heroically saving the wizard world, or perhaps he > should do it right after Snape called him a lying, strutting, > publicity seeking brat. Alla: Umm. Not that I disagree with the general idea of your post, but when did Snape called Harry that? Eggplant: > Consider the end of book 5, Harry had saved the would many times and > Snape knew that Harry had just lost his beloved Godfather and had > suffered the tortures of the dammed, but Snape was so incredibly > small that he still sneered at him and took points from Gryffindor. > It is hypocritical to thank someone if you don't feel gratitude, > and it's easy to see why Harry has none toward Snape. Alla: Actually, you make a VERY good point here. See, I did not go as far as Pippin to think that Snape's behavior at the end of book 5 could be interpreted as him congratulating Harry, but I was ready to give the man some credit for agreeing that Harry and Co do deserve points. BUT he indeed took those points away in the first place. Now I think that he just did not want to lose face in front of Minerva, whom I do believe he respects. Now I think that if Snape KNEW what Harry just went through, his behaviour was sadistic. Typical Snape style. I actually don't think that anyone was suggesting that Harry should thank Snape at the end of OOP. Weren't we talking about PS/SS? From willsonkmom at msn.com Thu Nov 11 04:25:14 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 04:25:14 -0000 Subject: Muggle World (Was: Quills) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117583 >>>Carol wrote snip I still think the closest equivalent is the academic gowns worn by students at Oxford--not the modern version but the one that was worn from the thirteenth through the nineteenth centuries to distinguish the students (and faculty)from the ordinary townspeople--Town and Gown. Potioncat: Where would the rest of us find a picture or description of that? From khinterberg at yahoo.com Thu Nov 11 04:37:13 2004 From: khinterberg at yahoo.com (khinterberg) Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 04:37:13 -0000 Subject: Quirrell Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117584 It has always bothered me that in the last chapter of PS/SS Quirrell says Voldemort's name. "Tried to frighten me--as though he could, when I had Lord Voldemort on my side..." p290 U.S. pb And then again on the next page: "A foolish young man I was then, full of ridiculous ideas about good and evil. Lord Voldemort showed me how wrong I was." Why, when Death Eaters won't even say his name, can a young professor with Vapormort on the back of his head say it without any sign of fear whatsoever? There is no "Dark Lord" business, no trace of a cringe or sign on pain...what, frankly, is the deal? khinterberg From willsonkmom at msn.com Thu Nov 11 04:53:43 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 04:53:43 -0000 Subject: mistaken motives was Re: Why has DD never suggested Snape thank Harry? ( In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117585 Alla: Actually, you make a VERY good point here. See, I did not go as far as Pippin to think that Snape's behavior at the end of book 5 could be interpreted as him congratulating Harry, but I was ready to give the man some credit for agreeing that Harry and Co do deserve points. > > BUT he indeed took those points away in the first place. Now I think that he just did not want to lose face in front of Minerva, whom I do believe he respects. Now I think that if Snape KNEW what Harry just went through, his behaviour was sadistic. Typical Snape style. Potioncat: You know, I've often read the books as if Snape knows what's going on and shows up in time to stop Draco and Harry from going at it. (Not sure whom I thought he was protecting) But it's just as likely that JKR has Snape showing up just in time to get the wrong idea. Particularly if Snape does think Harry is just like James and if James really did hex people for the fun of it. At the end of OoP, it reads to me that Snape walks into the entrance hall in time to see Potter pointing his wand at Draco, whose wand is still in his pocket. Snape askes what Potter is doing and Harry says he's deciding which hex to use on Draco. (From memory, sorry if I'm wrong.) Snape suggests taking points, says there aren't any to take and is interrupted before he can say what he will do...detention? forget about it? send Potter to Filch? treat the boys to ice cream? But he makes no protest when McGonagall suggests rewarding the students for revealing LV. McGonagall manages to split Crabbe and Goyle from Draco then sends Draco and Harry outside. I assume she and Snape think Draco is harmless without his minions. I think McGonagall took the 10 points away to keep Snape from losing face. He had just suggested it when she came in. I don't think Snape was being at all sadistic. Either he was walking in on a scene and jumped to the wrong conclusion or he knew what was going on and was breaking it up. It reminds me of the scene when Neville was going to attack Draco for making fun of patients at St. Mungo's. Harry was holding Neville back when Snape opened the door and Snape docked Gryffindor for fighting. (But he didn't dock them very much.) Actually, I think McGonagall has taken more points from Gryffindor than Snape has when there has been a Gryffindor-Slytherin conflict. (Late night out of bounds when she thinks Harry tricked Draco about a dragon and fist fight between Weasley/Potter and Malfoy after Quidditch game.) Potioncat From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Thu Nov 11 05:00:03 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 05:00:03 -0000 Subject: Who took more points from Gryffindors In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117586 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "potioncat" wrote: > > Actually, I think McGonagall has taken more points from Gryffindor > than Snape has when there has been a Gryffindor-Slytherin conflict. > (Late night out of bounds when she thinks Harry tricked Draco about > a dragon and fist fight between Weasley/Potter and Malfoy after > Quidditch game.) > Alla: She did, my Dear, definitely she did that time. :o) (Still think that in general Snape took much more points from Gryffs over yeasr) It speaks to her sense of fairness really well. Who knows, maybe at the end of book 7 we'll see Snape taking at least on point of Slytherin just for the sake of making me happy. :) From willsonkmom at msn.com Thu Nov 11 05:05:52 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 05:05:52 -0000 Subject: Who took more points from Gryffindors In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117587 Potioncat: > > Actually, I think McGonagall has taken more points from Gryffindor than Snape has when there has been a Gryffindor- Slytherin conflict. > > (Late night out of bounds when she thinks Harry tricked Draco > about > > a dragon and fist fight between Weasley/Potter and Malfoy after > > Quidditch game.) > > > > > Alla: > > She did, my Dear, definitely she did that time. :o) (Still think > that in general Snape took much more points from Gryffs over yeasr) > It speaks to her sense of fairness really well. Who knows, maybe at > the end of book 7 we'll see Snape taking at least on point of > Slytherin just for the sake of making me happy. :) Potioncat again: I'm sure Snape lives to make you happy. You enviable creature,you. ;-) BTW, does anyone remember Snape ever giving anyone points? I recall him praising Draco's skill at something or other, (slicing, dicing?) but I don't remember that he gave points for it. From snow15145 at yahoo.com Thu Nov 11 05:43:57 2004 From: snow15145 at yahoo.com (snow15145) Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 05:43:57 -0000 Subject: Harry's moral core vs. Voldie's In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117588 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "delwynmarch" wrote: > > Carol wrote : > " Mrs. Riddle making the effort as she's dying to name her son after > his father and her own strikes me as an act of love not only for the > infant but for the two men involved. > (snip) > > Carol, hoping the mothers on the list will understand the significance > of such a moment" > > Del replies : > If you're right, then it's downright tragically ironic that Tom Jr > came to hate and despise that name ! An act of love turned into a seed > of hate... > > Del, who is a mother and was indeed moved by Carol's explanation Snow: Ditto on the mothering attributes if this is what actually happened? But Young Tom Riddle was fed information about his early family, as was Harry. We know that Harry's information about his parents demise was falsified, why not Tom's? What do we actually know about Tom's parents? His father was rich and as snobbish as they come and his maternal grandfather's name was Marvalo whom was a descendant of Salazar Slytherin. Everything else is conjecture! DiaryTom claims may not be substantiated. Yes, someone, presumably the orphanage, told Tom that his mother told them what his name was to be etc. but Harry was also told that `his' parents died in a car crash. Harry believed his parents fate until he was told and proven otherwise. Likewise, I believe that Tom under similar (in a way best representative of the currant circumstance) was told something to appease his questioning. Tom believed what he was told, as did Harry, and both were lied to for rationalizing purposes. I personally believe that Tom's mother lived, and may still be living, but was forced to choose between her son and his rejecting father or her wizarding world connection with the last of the pure royalty line of Slytherin. I am curious why everyone appears to take young Tom Riddle's facts, as were given to Tom at a young age, so seriously? This is muggle world (orphanage) vs. wizarding world, the Harry/Dursley world vs. the Dumbledore/wizarding world. The out and out lies of a muggle world that does not want to accept the wizarding world compared to the truth, and all it entails, that has been denied to both Harry and Tom; the wizarding world. Harry and Tom are more alike than maybe we realize or would like to admit. What is the difference between them and especially their mothers? It is the lack of information about Tom's mother and her past that allows me to question young Tom's beliefs that had been told to him. We, the readers, have at least been aloud a glimpse into what Harry's mother Lily was like through the eyes of her friends and teachers but the absence of Tom's mother's former information leaves me in denial of a truthful explanation from Tom's caretakers let alone to believe young Tom's second hand knowledge of the so called events. Snow From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Thu Nov 11 05:44:30 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 05:44:30 -0000 Subject: Unreliable narrator (Was: Snape's stalling) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117589 Neri wrote: > > > > At the risk of repeating my repetitions of myself, I must > maintain that my analysis of the night of the MoM battle raises at > least as much suspicion against Snape.< > Pippin responded: > Okay, now I get it. You're saying that Rowling may have hidden a > clue about Snape in the same manner as I contend she has > hidden clues about Lupin, and I, in my pro-Snape bias, failed to > give the possibility due weight. > > You could be right, in which case you have discovered a genuine > red herring (assuming that Snape is not ESE!) and I take off my > virtual hat to you. > > Of course if a character points out that it was a far more serious > fault than Harry imagines for Snape not to go to the forest in > immediate pursuit, that will only point up that it was a far more > serious fault than Harry imagines for Lupin not to tell what he > knew about Sirius, the map, or the unguarded secret entrance > into the castle. It will, BTW, emphasize that the narrator is > unreliable, in not bringing these faults to our attention as they > occurred. > > You see, I really *am* interested in narrative technique, though I > will admit that sometimes my biases get in the way. Carol asks: Not being able at the moment to check out the whole thread, I just have one question. Snape was kicked out of Umbridge's office. How could he even know that Harry, Hermione, and Umbridge had gone into the forest? Maybe he had some sort of spy network to inform him that the Gryffindors had attacked the Slytherins and he needed to go upstairs and sort it out, or maybe he heard Malfoy's screams several floors above his office when Ginny hit him with her Bat-Bogey Hex. Either way, he couldn't have known anything about it until that point, and then he would have had to undo some hexes, stop six people from talking at once, and send Malfoy to Madam Pomfrey. By that time, Harry and company would be well on their way to the MoM (depending on how fast Thestrals fly). Another question that just occurred to me: Snape "deduced" (DD's word) that Harry et al. had gone to the MoM. How could he figure that out? Yes, of course, he knew about Harry's supposed vision and knew it was false. He also knew that Harry had not succeeded in contacting Sirius to find out that it was false. *But* Snape also knows that Harry can't apparate and didn't have a broom. (He may have known or guessed that Ron returned Harry's wand.) How, then, did he think Harry (and his friends) could have gotten to the MoM? He couldn't know that they had taken the Thestrals until after he entered the Forbidden Forest and was informed by the Centaurs (if they would deign to tell him). Maybe he thought they had taken the Flying Ford Anglia? I agree with Neri that there are lots of holes in our knowledge of the events in this chapter, but they don't necessarily point to irresponsibility on Snape's part. There were holes in *his* knowledge, too. Does anyone have theories on this? If it was considered in your analysis of the timeline, Neri, just send me to the proper post upthread. Carol, with apologies for being rushed again but I need to catch up before leaving town for a four-day computerless weekend! From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Thu Nov 11 06:13:02 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 06:13:02 -0000 Subject: Dursleys abuse In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117590 Renee wrote: > What I would suggest is that we don't treat Petunia too much like a > separate entity. There's Vernon, too. He resents being saddled with > his wife's baby nephew - the boy is in no way related to him, so he > doesn't feel a shred of obligation there. > > Quite possibly - gasp - Petunia actually loves Vernon, or at least > did so when Harry entered their household. Vernon hates the boy, and > she's simply not prepared to turn against him on Harry's behalf. I > never get the impression she's the dominant partner; does she put > her foot down more than once? > Carol notes: In the very first chapter of PS/SS, we see that Vernon is afraid to tell Petunia that he's overheard strangely dressed people discussing the Potters in the street. And as Alla indicates elsewhere, it's Petunia's decision, not Vernon's to take Harry in. Presumably she overrides his desire to give the baby to an orphanage. Later in SS/PS, the dominance switches to Vernon, as he madly attempts to hide from the deluge of letters, but it's Petunia who lets out all her bottled up frustration and lets Harry hear a bit of the truth (as she perceives it) about Harry's parents and their death. In OoP, it's of course Petunia who understands the references to Dementors and Voldemort and determines that Harry must stay. As I said over a year ago, Vernon is the arch-Muggle and has anti-wizard prejudices that mirror the anti-Muggle prejudices of the purebloods. He fears magic and anything "abnormal" and doesn't want to be associated with it. His desire in the early books is to stamp it out of Harry. Petunia, although she shares his fear of what the neighbors will think, has a much clearer idea of what the magical world actually is from having had a sister who was a witch. She knows, for example, that the Potters' house "blew up," although she seems to (irrationally) consider Harry responsible. ("We can't leave him alone in the house! He'll blow it up!") And we know she's received a Howler from Dumbledore, implying previous communication with him--or at least from him, before the letter that was clutched in Harry's hand. She knew, too, what was in Harry's Hogwarts letter and, unlike Vernon, seemed to know it was futile to fight it. I don't think we can consider the Dursleys as a unit. Yes, Petunia is a Muggle, but she's a Muggle with WW connections. No, I don't think we'll see her perform magic (as some people on this list have suggested), but I do think she has more secrets that she's kept even from Vernon, and that we'll learn what they are in Book 6 or 7. And for what it's worth, I do think the Dursleys love each other, or at least Vernon loves Petunia. Maybe she's been holding onto her secrets for fear of losing that love. Carol From kelly at protocallonline.com Thu Nov 11 06:19:22 2004 From: kelly at protocallonline.com (kellymcj2000) Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 06:19:22 -0000 Subject: arthur weasley Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117591 Did anyone ever find the significance of Arthur being one of three brothers or of Ginny being the first girl in several generations? Is there some legend somewhere about when a daughter is born to one of three brothers xxxxxxxx will happen? Or anything about girls popping up in families of all boys? thanks for any information kmc From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Thu Nov 11 06:25:32 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 06:25:32 -0000 Subject: Brain room In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117592 Kim wrote: > > "You know that Brain Room in the Dept. of Mysteries? Whose brains > did they used to be? Do you think it matters?" > Maddy responded: > > I've wondered about the brains as well, but I hadn't even thought of > who the brains might have belonged to. It is a creepy thought though, isn't it? I mean, I believe that some university had Albert Enstein's brain preserved for study, but the fact that the brains are described as "swimming" (or at least that's how I remember it; don't have my book on hand) makes them seem as though they are somehow *alive*. And that is want irks me the most about them. After Ron summons a brain, it has "tentacles" that try to strangle him. And if IRC they seem to display a projection of thoughts of some sort, don't they? > > Perhaps the liquid that they were in has some magical properties in > them that keeps them from decaying, but also keeps them active > somehow. > > Something I did wonder about with respect to the brains is how Ron > will be affected by his contact with one of them. Didn't Hermione say that Madame Pomfrey had said that memories/thoughts from someone > else's brain can do far more damage than his other wounds? I've > wonder if Ron will start having memories or something from the person who's brain that was? Maybe it's similar to a legillimens/occlumens process...only instead of having your own memories broken into, > someone else forces their memories onto you. > Carol notes: Yet Ron's injuries seem to be physical, like the sting from the tentacles of a jellyfish (despite the octopuslike appearance), and the not always reliable narrator reports that both he and Hermione were restored to perfect health after about three days in the hospital wing. I can't recall any indication that Ron is not back to normal. Does anyone? (The brain, BTW, had lost *some* of its memories before it attacked him, but given the number of memories in an adult human brain, its potency probably was not affected.) As for whose brains are in the tank, maybe they're from the Muggle equivalent of organ donors.(?) Carol, wondering what the curse was that Dolohov used on Hermione From kelly at protocallonline.com Thu Nov 11 06:33:35 2004 From: kelly at protocallonline.com (kellymcj2000) Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 06:33:35 -0000 Subject: Quirrell In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117593 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "khinterberg" wrote: > > It has always bothered me that in the last chapter of PS/SS Quirrell > says Voldemort's name. > > "Tried to frighten me--as though he could, when I had Lord Voldemort > on my side..." p290 U.S. pb > > And then again on the next page: > > "A foolish young man I was then, full of ridiculous ideas about good > and evil. Lord Voldemort showed me how wrong I was." > > Why, when Death Eaters won't even say his name, can a young professor > with Vapormort on the back of his head say it without any sign of fear > whatsoever? There is no "Dark Lord" business, no trace of a cringe or > sign on pain...what, frankly, is the deal? > > khinterberg Never noticed that before, but I'd guess it's because he's possessed by old moldy voldy. And at the time he's raving about how fabulous and powerful lv is. Or maybe JKR just hadn't quite worked out yet exactly who would and wouldn't be able to say the name. That's all I can think of. It's sooo late and i'm braindying. kmc From juli17 at aol.com Thu Nov 11 06:46:25 2004 From: juli17 at aol.com (juli17 at aol.com) Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 01:46:25 EST Subject: DD's respect for Snape (Was: Unreliable narrator - The Snape Timeline Message-ID: <9e.19279559.2ec464c1@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 117594 Alla wrote: > Now, I am not saying that Dumbledore can feel the affection towards > Snape, but if he does, he hides it well, IMO. > I just have to note that if Dumbledore dislikes Snape, he also hides that well, IMO ;-) In fact, it's hard to figure out what Dumbledore feels for many teachers and students, beyond amused tolerance. The strongest sense I get about Dumbledore's feelings for Snape is that he holds Snape to certain expectations, and gently admonishes Snape toward improvement when Snape is not meeting those expectations. Dumbledore's clearly has something vested in Snape's redemption, and I suspect some of that is emotional investment--i.e. he's fond of the greasy git, or at least, of the inner goodness he's certain dwells somewhere deep (perhaps very deep!) within our ornery potion master's soul. Julie [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Thu Nov 11 06:51:04 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 06:51:04 -0000 Subject: Every Tom, Dick and Harry... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117595 Kim wrote: > Outside of JKR bringing in a connection to real living royals, I > wonder what kind of royalty of its own the WW might have. Were the > four Hogwarts founders from some royal wizarding lineage? Slytherin > was definitely a racist and a snob, but was he also royal? (not that > I'm suggesting the real royals are racists and snobs) What about > the other three founders? So far in the HP books, I don't think > there's been a reference to any royalty either in the WW past or > present, but I may be mistaken. But it makes total sense for there > to have been royal wizards once upon a time at least. > Carol notes: I like to think that Godric Gryffindor might have been a half-blood prince, if not *the* HPB. He was a wizard, but his jewel-encrusted sword appears to be a Muggle weapon--or an enchanted Muggle artifact, at any rate. He probably did live at a time when Muggle kings had wizard advisors, when the anti-wizard prejudice Slytherin was so upset about had barely touched the British Isles. (Someone complained that Godric and Rowena were Saxon names--they ought to have been Celtic--but maybe they reflect that half-blood heritage. Gryffindor isn't all that far from Gruffydd, the name of several Welsh kings.) I'm also wondering if GG was a contemporary of Merlin. Does anyone have the dates for Merlin on the Famous Wizard cards? Carol, noting that even Lucius Malfoy uses "Merlin's beard!" as some sort of mild oath From kelly at protocallonline.com Thu Nov 11 07:06:01 2004 From: kelly at protocallonline.com (kellymcj2000) Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 07:06:01 -0000 Subject: hero or Hero? (was Re: Is Harry feeling guilty for being alive?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117596 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "dumbledore11214" wrote: > > > > Eustac: > > In Harry's case, he is not (as far as we know now) the scion of > some > > ancient royal house--although there's always the chance that he's > the > > "heir of Gryffindor" which would change things a bit. > > > Alla: > > I think it is a very strong possibility and don't forget that JKR > did tease us that "he may be the heir of Gryffindor" > I think Harry's definitely an heir of Gryffindor, probably not the only one though. We would then have the heir of slytherin battle an heir of gryffindor. I do think many of our main characters could trace their ancestry back to gryffindor btw. kmc From bboyminn at yahoo.com Thu Nov 11 07:29:42 2004 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 07:29:42 -0000 Subject: Apparition lessons (was Re: Draco's POV?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117597 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Jim Ferer" wrote: > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Kathleen Hunt > wrote: > > > > > Andrea: > > > > One thing I've wondered is how students about to > > > > come of age learn to apparate. > > Juli now: > > Maybe there are classes at the beginning of > > their 6th or 7th year at Hogwarts, depending on when > > they turn 17, ... >> "figgys26cats" > > How can they have apparating lesson, when no one inside of > > Hogwarts can apperate or diapperate? > Jim: > Madame Hooch: "Is everyone here? Very well, we'll be walking down to > Hogsmeade so that we can practice Apparating and Disapparating, ..." > > Jim Ferer bboyminn: Or how about just stepping outside the front gate to practice Apparating. Student are not legally allowed to /do/ any kind of magic outside of school; Apparation is no different. Given that Apparation is dangerous, I have to believe it will be an in-school, but off grounds class taught by some one with expertise in the matter. It seems a little too dangerous to leave to parents, as some have suggested, and impossible for muggle parents to teach. So, again, I think it will model all the other magic they are being taught, and therefore be taught at school. Real world driving and driver's licenses are most often used as a model for Apparation training and certification, but I don't think we can safely count on it model that exact method. It is possible that students might take classes during the summer of their 17th year from some sourse other than Hogwarts, and that would closely model the process for a British Driver's license. Comparing the British model to the USA model for driver's license, in Britian you must reach driving age before even applying for a learning permit; Driving age=17, get your Permit at 17. However, in the USA, you get you Learning Permit at the pre-driving age of 15, and get your license at the full driving age of 16. British student most frequently hire private driving instructor to teach them at great personal expense, whereas in the USA, Driver's Training is integrated into the secondary schools. Still I am betting on it being taught at Hogwarts mainly because I am VERY keen to learn the details of how it's done and what it feels like. One small weakness in this theory is that we have never heard Hermione (know-it-all) or any of the older characers talk about the process. It seems as if it were part of school, then we would have heard about it at school. Just a few thoughts. Steve/bboyminn (was bboy_mn) From gbannister10 at aol.com Thu Nov 11 07:46:10 2004 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 07:46:10 -0000 Subject: Harry's moral core vs. Voldie's In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117598 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "ginnysthe1" wrote: Kim: > > Firstly, I don't think it's certain that Tom Riddle's mother was the > one who named her son, as Carol suggests. She may have died before > she could do that, she may not have known he would be a boy (although > she could have picked out a boy's and a girl's name ahead of time, > just in case). Maybe it was the birth attendant, the midwife, or > someone else who named him after his father (which would mean they > had to know who the father was). I admit it's all maybe. Geoff: If I may disagree, according to canon, she did. '"You live in a muggle orphanage during the holidays, I believe?" said Dippet curiously. "Yes, sir" said Riddle,reddening slightly. "You are Muggle-born?" "Half-blood, sir," said Riddle. "Muggle father, witch mother." "And are both of your parents - ?" "My mother died just after I was born, sir. They told me at the orphanage she lived just long enough to name me. Tom after my father, Marvolo after my grandfather."' (COS "The Very Secret Diary" p.182 UK edition) Your idea of an attendant or midwife naming him would probably have been unlikely anyway, because they would also have had to have known the grandfather's name.... Geoff http://www.aspectsofexmoor.com From greatraven at hotmail.com Thu Nov 11 08:25:22 2004 From: greatraven at hotmail.com (sbursztynski) Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 08:25:22 -0000 Subject: Muggle World (Was: Quills) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117599 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "potioncat" wrote: > > >>>Carol wrote > snip > I still think the closest equivalent is the academic gowns worn by > students at Oxford--not the modern version but the one that was worn > from the thirteenth through the nineteenth centuries to distinguish > the students (and faculty)from the ordinary townspeople--Town and > Gown. > > Potioncat: > Where would the rest of us find a picture or description of that? Sue: Most books on mediaeval history should have this. Or try Google images. I agree with Carol, BTW. The WW is very conservative and has a long history, as does Hogwarts in particular. I wouldn't be at all surprised if the uniform was pretty old-style, though, of course, someone would have had to change it at some stage, since Hogwarts was founded 1000 years ago! ;-) From greatraven at hotmail.com Thu Nov 11 08:33:23 2004 From: greatraven at hotmail.com (sbursztynski) Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 08:33:23 -0000 Subject: Who took more points from Gryffindors In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117600 --- > > Potioncat again: > I'm sure Snape lives to make you happy. You enviable creature,you. > ;-) > > BTW, does anyone remember Snape ever giving anyone points? I recall > him praising Draco's skill at something or other, (slicing, dicing?) > but I don't remember that he gave points for it. Sue: Now you mention it, I don't remember him ever giving points even to his own house. I suspect the author wouldn't let him do anything that positive. But then - do you recall McGonagall ever giving any points? I don't. Flitwick has, and Sprout and, of course, Dumbledore on the memorable occasion at the end of the first novel. But either point-giving happens off-stage or it's just not something teachers do that often. There has to be somewhere they're getting all those hundreds of points, but we do know they get some from Quidditch match wins. Not sure why, but I do vaguely recall the other students being annoyed with Harry for losing points they had just won with the Quidditch match. From cldrolet at sympatico.ca Thu Nov 11 08:43:41 2004 From: cldrolet at sympatico.ca (Cathy Drolet) Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 03:43:41 -0500 Subject: Kreacher's bandages References: <1100151878.3014.13395.m25@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <001a01c4c7ca$8c683fa0$5ac2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> No: HPFGUIDX 117601 Carol said: "Has anyone noticed that Kreacher's hands are bandaged as if he has just ironed them when Harry tries to contact Sirius Black using Umbridge's fireplace (OoP Am. ed. 740)? Has he ironed them in advance because he's in the process of betraying his master or because he has just injured Buckbeak or . . . ? Ideas, anybody?" DuffyPoo: I'd say it was injuries from Buckbeak. Kreacher had no loyalty to Sirius but was forced to do as he asked because of enslavement to the family. I doubt Kreacher would feel the need to iron his hands for betraying Sirius. From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com Thu Nov 11 10:31:41 2004 From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (arrowsmithbt) Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 10:31:41 -0000 Subject: Inside Harry's mind In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117602 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "annemehr" wrote: > > Annemehr: > Oooooooh. Never even thought of that before, the Lily-protection-thing > keeping Harry's inner Voldy in check. > > In CoS, it almost seems that Dumbledore views Harry carrying a bit of > LV around an advantage, doesn't it? "Not something he meant to do." > But after GoF, he's afraid of it. > > Puts a new spin on the Occlumency lessons, too. If LV is putting > thoughts into Harry's head, is he really doing it *through* Harry's > bit of him? That would negate any considerations of distance between > their physical bodies; LV now has a permanent proximity to him and > something much, much more intimate than mere eye contact. It gets LV > behind all the Hogwarts defenses in a way, as well. > > But on Harry's side, he's very stubborn. Determined. Strong-willed. I > think that quality is all Harry's. So he'll put up quite a fight. > Yeah, I've mentioned his personality change before, as have others, but thought it was the effect of the dreams - an outside influence - rather than something stirring internally. Could be both of course, one boosting the other. Mind you, so far as we're aware Harry is the only person that Voldy can get at from a distance; oh there's the Dark Mark, but that appears to be more of a paging system than bi-lateral communications. And when Harry also happens to be the only individual that has a piece of Voldy right there in his head - a maggot burrowing into the cream cheese - it offers an explanation of why he can communicate at a distance. It's likely that Voldy sees an unprotected Harry as a Trojan Horse and yes, he could see it as a way to get behind the defences of both Hogwarts and the Order. He's made a first try with trying to get Harry to attack DD. Of course, if he was a really Machiavellian type of villain his most effective ploy could be to influence Harry to do nothing, to opt out of the fight. That would leave DD in a hell of a mess. The mind influence seems to be different to the possession he attempted at the Ministry, much more subtle and with no sign that it can be excluded by whatever it was that forced Voldy to abandon the possession attempt. Determined and stubborn. Is this a good thing? Remember DD in CoS? "You have many qualities Salazar Slytherin prized in his hand-picked students. His own very rare gift, Parseltongue...resourcefulness... determination....a certain disregard for the rules." And the Hat considers Slytherins stubborn - " ...use any means to achieve there ends." It all depends on just what it is Harry gets determined and stubborn about. If he continues in the same vein as he did in DD's study at the end of OoP, lashing out, blaming everybody in sight, it could get very hairy indeed. Kneasy From jlnbtr at yahoo.com Thu Nov 11 01:58:23 2004 From: jlnbtr at yahoo.com (Juli) Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2004 17:58:23 -0800 (PST) Subject: Apparition lessons (was Re: Draco's POV?) In-Reply-To: <20041111005905.96457.qmail@web51706.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041111015823.68322.qmail@web53105.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 117603 > Juli now: Maybe there are classes at the beginning > of their 6th or 7th year at Hogwarts, depending on when > they turn 17, > > "figgys26cats": > How can they have apparating lesson, when no one > inside of Hogwarts can apparate or diapparate? > Haven't you read the Hogwarts History book yet? > Oops, sorry only Hermione has read it. Ooops, I forgot Hermione mentioned it about a thousand times in each and every book, plus Snape mentioned it in PoA, and Umbridge on OoP... If you know where to find the book, I'd like to be the second person to read it ;) Maybe they go to Hogsmeade for the Apparition lessons. This has to be taught at school, sure Arthur could teach the Weasley kids how to, but how about Hermione, the Patil sisters and many other muggle borns? Juli From jlnbtr at yahoo.com Thu Nov 11 02:08:55 2004 From: jlnbtr at yahoo.com (Juli) Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2004 18:08:55 -0800 (PST) Subject: Apparition lessons (was Re: Draco's POV?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041111020855.22258.qmail@web53104.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 117604 --- Jim Ferer wrote: > Madame Hooch: "Is everyone here? Very well, we'll be > walking down to Hogsmeade so that we can practice > Apparating and Disapparating, but before we begin, > understand that those of you under the age of 17 are > not permitted to do it on your own before you are 17 > years old and have passed the official Ministry test." But how can you pass a test if you've nerver studied it before? Maybe while at Hogsmeade they are taught how to apparate, the basics, like from Zonko's to the Hog's Head. They kids seem to take their test during the summer after they turn 17, so between the time they turn 17 and the summer they learn how to. Juli From stonehenge.orders at verizon.net Thu Nov 11 03:49:48 2004 From: stonehenge.orders at verizon.net (kjirstem) Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 03:49:48 -0000 Subject: Brain room In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117605 > Kim wrote: > > "You know that Brain Room in the Dept. of Mysteries? Whose brains > did they used to be? Do you think it matters?" > > Maddy writes: > > ...but the fact that the brains are described > as "swimming" (or at least that's how I remember it; don't have my > book on hand) makes them seem as though they are somehow *alive*. And > that is want irks me the most about them. After Ron summons a brain, > it has "tentacles" that try to strangle him. And if IRC they seem to > display a projection of thoughts of some sort, don't they? kjirstem: I found this the most disturbing room of the lot, I kept thinking that Harry was going to find a label saying "Harry Potter" on the vat. After all, he has that scar. (And what's inside his head then? Marshmallow fluff? ) Like Maddy I was most bothered by the brains seeming alive. Some of the things I wonder about are whether they were obtained with their owners consent and what their existence in a vat means for those owners. Can they be "properly dead" if their brains are alive? As for who they are or used to be, maybe they're puppetmasters controlling the Wizarding World....or maybe they are just the WW equivalent of data backup. From clearlychaotic at yahoo.com Thu Nov 11 05:00:14 2004 From: clearlychaotic at yahoo.com (Dijana) Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 05:00:14 -0000 Subject: DD's respect for Snape (Was: Unreliable narrator - The Snape Timeline In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117606 Alla wrote: > What do you make out of the ending of PoA , for example when > Dumbledore rather harshly stops Snape's hysterics? > > > > To me, it looked like rather cruel mockery by Dumbledore, because > I think that all teachers know about time-turners, not just > McGonagall, so Dumbledore practically tells him what happened and > tells him to shut up. I don't see how Dumbledore is being harsh to Snape, after all he is speaking to Snape both "quietly" and "calmly". I wouldn't say it looked like cruel mockery either. > In any event, the most what I saw from Dumbledore in that scene is > pity towards the man "who is not unbalanced, just suffered a > severe disappointment" Dumbledore obviously knows Snape well enough to give 'pity' where it's due. He knows that Snape would have "suffered a severe disappointment" since he knows exactly how Snape feels towards Sirius and how much he would have wanted that Order Merlin... > Now, I am not saying that Dumbledore can feel the affection > towards Snape, but if he does, he hides it well, IMO. Yes, but how much affection does Dumbledore display towards Minerva (or even Hagrid)? I would think that after knowing Snape for more than 20 years, Dumbledore would at least feel some affection towards Snape (and not just tolerating him). Dumbledore also hid his affection well from Harry..I think that much is obvious from the end of book 5. ~Ana From nightmasque at yahoo.com Thu Nov 11 09:02:14 2004 From: nightmasque at yahoo.com (Feng Zengkun) Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 01:02:14 -0800 (PST) Subject: Quirrell In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041111090214.7262.qmail@web52602.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 117607 khinterberg: >It has always bothered me that in the last chapter of PS/SS Quirrell >says Voldemort's name. > >"Tried to frighten me--as though he could, when I had Lord Voldemort >on my side..." p290 U.S. pb > >And then again on the next page: > >"A foolish young man I was then, full of ridiculous ideas about good >and evil. Lord Voldemort showed me how wrong I was." > >Why, when Death Eaters won't even say his name, can a young professor >with Vapormort on the back of his head say it without any sign of fear >whatsoever? There is no "Dark Lord" business, no trace of a cringe or >sign on pain...what, frankly, is the deal? zk: It struck me that it's Voldemort speaking through Quirrell, and not actually Quirrell speaking. The tone of what Quirrell says is exactly the tone Voldemort uses when the latter speaks, and (although I could be wrong) doesn't Voldemort refer to himself in the third person in other instances? I don't have the book with me at the moment, but I think Voldemort says (paraphrasing) 'Lord Voldemort is kind/generous, he will forgive' or something like that. I think it was the graveyard scene in GoF? Damn it. Can someone supply the quote (if there is one)? From gbannister10 at aol.com Thu Nov 11 11:26:54 2004 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 11:26:54 -0000 Subject: Quirrell In-Reply-To: <20041111090214.7262.qmail@web52602.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117608 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Feng Zengkun wrote: zk: > > It struck me that it's Voldemort speaking through Quirrell, and not > actually Quirrell speaking. The tone of what Quirrell says is exactly the > tone Voldemort uses when the latter speaks, and (although I could be wrong) doesn't Voldemort refer to himself in the third person in other instances? I don't have the book with me at the moment, but I think Voldemort says (paraphrasing) 'Lord Voldemort is kind/generous, he will forgive' or something like that. I think it was the graveyard scene in GoF? Damn it. Can someone supply the quote (if there is one)? Geoff: Your memory is quite right; Voldemort does refer to himself in the third person in the graveyard scene. I must admit I'd never really taken that on board prior to you mentioning it. 'He looked down at Wormtail who continued to sob. "You returned to me, not out of loyalty but out of fear of your old friends. You deserve this pain, Wormtail. You know that, don't you?" "Yes, master," moaned Wormtail, "please, master... please..." "Yet you helped me return to my body," said Voldemort coolly, watching Wormtail sob on the ground. "Worthless and traitorous as you are, you helped me... and Lord Voldemort rewards his helpers.."' (GOF "The Death Eaters" p.563 UK edition) and again.... '"MacNair... destroying dangerous beasts for the Ministry of Magic now, Wormtail tells me? You shall have better victims than that soon, MacNair. Lord Voldemort will provide..."' (ibid. p.565) Geoff http://www.aspectsofexmoor.com From cat_kind at yahoo.com Thu Nov 11 11:29:50 2004 From: cat_kind at yahoo.com (cat_kind) Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 11:29:50 -0000 Subject: Apparition lessons (was Re: Draco's POV?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117609 > Andrea: > One thing I've wondered is how students about to > come of age learn to apparate. (snip much discussion) > > bboyminn: > > Or how about just stepping outside the front gate to practice Apparating. > > Student are not legally allowed to /do/ any kind of magic outside of > school; Apparation is no different. Given that Apparation is > dangerous, I have to believe it will be an in-school, but off grounds > class taught by some one with expertise in the matter. It seems a > little too dangerous to leave to parents, as some have suggested, and > impossible for muggle parents to teach. So, again, I think it will > model all the other magic they are being taught, and therefore be > taught at school. > > Real world driving and driver's licenses are most often used as a > model for Apparation training and certification, but I don't think we > can safely count on it model that exact method. > > It is possible that students might take classes during the summer of > their 17th year from some sourse other than Hogwarts, and that would > closely model the process for a British Driver's license. > (snip) > Still I am betting on it being taught at Hogwarts mainly because I am > VERY keen to learn the details of how it's done and what it feels > like. One small weakness in this theory is that we have never heard > Hermione (know-it-all) or any of the older characers talk about the > process. It seems as if it were part of school, then we would have > heard about it at school. catkind: I suppose I'd better try to defend the apparition parallels driving hypothesis, seeing as no one else likes it. Firstly, the fact that Muggle-born students have to learn: This isn't a problem; they, and most wizard-born students, would learn from professional Apparation teachers. Just like most people have private driving instructors, whether their parents drive or not. People like the Weasleys wouldn't want the cost of a private teacher, so would do it themselves. After they are 17, of course, so it is legal to practice. I think the fact that the Weasleys take the test over the summer is also a point in favour: if it were taught at school (where I don't mean literally in the school grounds), wouldn't it make more sense for the test to take place in school, or with a school-organised trip to the ministry testing centre? On the other hand, I don't think the fact we haven't heard about Apparation classes is actually much of an argument against their existence. For example, no one mentioned Hogsmeade trips before Book 3, I think? Also, I wouldn't have a problem with Apparation classes, if they exist, taking place in the school itself. You'd just have to charm a classroom to allow apparition only within its boundaries. This would seem a much safer way to practice anyway, you'd lose less students. (oops, sorry Professor, accidentally apparated into the Honeydukes cellar, then I couldn't find my way out...) But then, they'd need to learn to apparate longer distances, where the instructor would probably have to apparate with them in case they got lost. So I'm leaning again towards individual lessons not classes, and back to private lessons. Agreed, it would be a lot of fun to see how it is done. catkind (who didn't intend to comment again on this and will really shut up now. honest.) From willsonkmom at msn.com Thu Nov 11 12:28:12 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 12:28:12 -0000 Subject: DD's respect for Snape (Was: Unreliable narrator - The Snape Timeline In-Reply-To: <9e.19279559.2ec464c1@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117610 Julie wrote: > > In fact, it's hard to figure out what Dumbledore feels for many > teachers and students, beyond amused tolerance. The strongest > sense I get about Dumbledore's feelings for Snape is that he > holds Snape to certain expectations, and gently admonishes > Snape toward improvement when Snape is not meeting those > expectations. Dumbledore's clearly has something vested in > Snape's redemption, and I suspect some of that is emotional > investment--i.e. he's fond of the greasy git, or at least, of the > inner goodness he's certain dwells somewhere deep (perhaps > very deep!) within our ornery potion master's soul. Potioncat: I've always wondered about this quote. It's from PoA chp 21, and it takes place in the hospital wing after Black is captured, Snape is talking, "You haven't forgotten that, Headmaster? You haven't forgotten that he once tried to kill *me*?" JKR did the italics...or the Scholastic editor did. Not, he tried to *kill* me but he tried to kill *me* It's as if Snape sees his relationship to DD as something special enough that being the target of murder should have been important. But I will say, trying to look at this objectively, it is hard to place DD's feelings about anyone. He doesn't even come across as disliking Lockhart. From willsonkmom at msn.com Thu Nov 11 12:37:09 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 12:37:09 -0000 Subject: Apparition lessons (was Re: Draco's POV?) In-Reply-To: <20041111015823.68322.qmail@web53105.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117611 Juli wrote: > Ooops, I forgot Hermione mentioned it about a thousand > times in each and every book, plus Snape mentioned it > in PoA, and Umbridge on OoP... If you know where to > find the book, I'd like to be the second person to > read it ;) Maybe they go to Hogsmeade for the > Apparition lessons. This has to be taught at school, > sure Arthur could teach the Weasley kids how to, but > how about Hermione, the Patil sisters and many other > muggle borns? > Potioncat: Hmm, why do you supose JKR has told us so many times that no one can Apparate inside the Hogwarts grounds? Are we getting too comfortable with that information? What do you think would happen if someone forgot, and tried to Apparate? Some poor sleep deprived 7th year late for Potions class? I'd be surprised if no one had ever tried it. I mean, knowing how many students have a disregard for rules... From willsonkmom at msn.com Thu Nov 11 12:42:21 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 12:42:21 -0000 Subject: Brain room In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117612 > > kjirstem: > > I found this the most disturbing room of the lot, I kept thinking that > Harry was going to find a label saying "Harry Potter" on the vat. > After all, he has that scar. (And what's inside his head then? > Marshmallow fluff? ) Like Maddy I was most bothered by the brains > seeming alive. Some of the things I wonder about are whether they > were obtained with their owners consent and what their existence in a > vat means for those owners. Can they be "properly dead" if their > brains are alive? > > As for who they are or used to be, maybe they're puppetmasters > controlling the Wizarding World....or maybe they are just the WW > equivalent of data backup. Potioncat: It reminded me of the old Frankenstein movies. And then it remined me of "Igor" taking "Abby Normal's" brain after smashing the good brain (Young Frankenstein) But I still think it was a Think Tank. Except the brains didn't seem very nice. From nrenka at yahoo.com Thu Nov 11 13:46:32 2004 From: nrenka at yahoo.com (nrenka) Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 13:46:32 -0000 Subject: DD's respect for Snape (Was: Unreliable narrator - The Snape Timeline In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117613 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "potioncat" wrote: > Potioncat: > I've always wondered about this quote. It's from PoA chp 21, and > it takes place in the hospital wing after Black is captured, > Snape is talking, "You haven't forgotten that, Headmaster? You > haven't forgotten that he once tried to kill *me*?" > > JKR did the italics...or the Scholastic editor did. Not, he tried > to *kill* me but he tried to kill *me* It's as if Snape sees his > relationship to DD as something special enough that being the > target of murder should have been important. I'd feel remiss in not posting the continuation, since the two parts are so much more interesting when put together: "My memory is as good as it ever was, Severus," said Dumbledore quietly. This smacks of a reminder of some sort, and I'm not quite sure what to do with it. It doesn't come across as dismissive per se, but I can't help but feeling it as something of a rebuke--'You and I both know what actually happened', with perhaps the continuation 'and it's not what matters now even though it was awful', OR perhaps 'and you know that's not what really went on'. For my own largely unsupported two cents, I feel some definite quasi- paternal vibes coming from Dumbledore towards Snape, but on the other hand, I think Dumbledore must also know what Snape is capable of and tries to keep him reined in, even inject a little humor and levity into his life. No idea if it's taken at all. What sits at the back of my mind troublingly is that we've seen Dumbledore tends to underestimate the power of personal feelings, I think partially because he is both old and powerful--the things that trouble others don't trouble him. Has Dumbledore underestimated the damage Snape can do to others on a daily basis within the school (possible)? I'm certainly not a fan of ESE!Snape, but I wonder. -Nora notes that she has read many, many discussions (not here) of how Dumbledore treats the poor innocent Snape like trash, and is merely using everyone around him in a mercenary manner for his own ends From quigonginger at yahoo.com Thu Nov 11 13:59:11 2004 From: quigonginger at yahoo.com (quigonginger) Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 13:59:11 -0000 Subject: Apparition lessons (was Re: Draco's POV?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117614 Steve (bboyminn) wrote: > Or how about just stepping outside the front gate to practice Apparating. > > Student are not legally allowed to /do/ any kind of magic outside of > school; Apparation is no different. Given that Apparation is > dangerous, I have to believe it will be an in-school, but off grounds > class taught by some one with expertise in the matter. (really big snip) Ginger: Perhaps there is an apparation range, so to speak. Kind of like a driving range. Back home there is a road that is never used since the Interstate went in. Everyone just went up there to teach their kids how to drive. It was just common knowledge that if you saw another vehicle, you pulled over until it passed because the driver was a 12 or 13 year old. (We get licenses at 14 here.) We had drivers ed at school, but it was kind of a joke- a simulator. Real practice was needed, with a permit usually. So back to Hogwarts. If there was a Ministry-approved peice of land right outside the gates set aside for that purpose, it would be out of school, but wouldn't fall under the prohibition of using magic outside of school. Kind of like that nasty parking lot with the cones we had to drive through to get our license. The method is taught, they practice over a short distance, and then the students use those skills to increase their distance on their own. Ginger, recalling fond memories of teaching Baby Sister to drive. "Clutch! Shift! Let out! Not so ...oh, drat" From quigonginger at yahoo.com Thu Nov 11 14:22:59 2004 From: quigonginger at yahoo.com (quigonginger) Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 14:22:59 -0000 Subject: Filk: AK in the UK Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117615 I thought long and hard for the perfect filk to dedicate to Pixieberry on her birthday. Hope this works. "AK in the UK" to the tune of "First Aid in the First Grade" from Jonah: A Veggietales Movie To Pixieberry with wishes for a very happy birthday. I think this is one of those filks that will have to be updated as new books come out. Now little Tommy Riddle was a very nasty kid. In the first Harry Potter book I read just what he did. Went to Godrick's Hollow in the fall of '81. Tried to kill a baby but he got himself undone. It was an AK in the UK. AK in the UK. AK in the UK. Hide under the covers- cuz the Dark Lord's on his way. Now little Tommy Riddle was a very nasty kid. In the second Harry Potter book I read just what he did. Went up to his grandfolks' house- C'mitted patricide. Y' should have seen the looks upon their faces when they died. It was an AK in the UK. AK in the UK. AK in the UK. Batten down the hatches- cuz the Dark Lord's on his way. Now little Tommy Riddle was a very nasty kid. In the third Harry Potter book I read just what he did. After Peter ratted, James sent Lily on the run. Voldy zapped them both but got zapped back by their son. It was an AK in the UK. AK in the UK. AK in the UK. Bar the doors and windows- cuz the Dark Lord's on his way. Now little Tommy Riddle was a very nasty kid. In the fourth Harry Potter book I read just what he did. Just an ugly baby, he could hardly hold a wand. Sent a nosy Muggle right into the Great Beyond. It was an AK in the UK. AK in the UK. AK in the UK. Someone owl an auror- cuz the Dark Lord's on his way. (harmonica interlude) Fifth book! Now little Tommy Riddle was a very nasty kid. In the fifth Harry Potter book I read just what he did. DE tried to wiggle out and take his oath all back- Membership is lifelong, so bye-bye to Reg'lus Black. It was an AK in the UK. AK in the UK. AK in the UK. Floo the kids to Exmoor- cuz the Dark Lord's on his way. Floo the kids to Exmoor -cuz the Dark Lord's on his way! Ginger (yes, the last line was a tip of the hat to Geoff) Did I mention that it's Pixieberry's BIRTHDAY? From willsonkmom at msn.com Thu Nov 11 14:29:40 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 14:29:40 -0000 Subject: DD's respect for Snape (Was: Unreliable narrator - The Snape Timeline In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117616 snipping here and there >> > Potioncat "You haven't forgotten that, Headmaster? You > > haven't forgotten that he once tried to kill *me*?" > > >>>Nora: > "My memory is as good as it ever was, Severus," said Dumbledore > quietly. > > This smacks of a reminder of some sort, and I'm not quite sure what to do with it. It doesn't come across as dismissive per se, but I can't help but feeling it as something of a rebuke--'You and I both know what actually happened', with perhaps the continuation 'and it's not what matters now even though it was awful', OR perhaps 'and you know that's not what really went on'. Potioncat: I have to agree. The two men know exactly what they are talking about, but we do not. It also sounds the way an adult child talks to an elderly parent who is losing his/her memory.(Although I don't think that is JKR's intent at all. Just my own personal life intruding) >>>Nora > > For my own largely unsupported two cents, I feel some definite quasi- paternal vibes coming from Dumbledore towards Snape, but on the other hand, I think Dumbledore must also know what Snape is capable of and tries to keep him reined in, even inject a little humor and levity into his life. No idea if it's taken at all. Potioncat: I've had the same thoughts. I've also seen what looks like sibling rivalry between Sirius and Severus. >>>Nora notes that she has read many, many discussions (not here) of how Dumbledore treats the poor innocent Snape like trash, and is merely using everyone around him in a mercenary manner for his own ends Potioncat: Poor innocent Snape? Severus has a brother? (A twin, no doubt) From foxmoth at qnet.com Thu Nov 11 14:42:52 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 14:42:52 -0000 Subject: Quirrell In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117617 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "khinterberg" wrote: > Why, when Death Eaters won't even say his name, can a young professor with Vapormort on the back of his head say it without any sign of fear whatsoever? There is no "Dark Lord" business, no trace of a cringe or sign on pain...what, frankly, is the deal? > It's a funny thing about secret names -- there's not much point unless *somebody* is allowed to say or hear them. "It was a name I was already using at Hogwarts, to my most intimate friends only, of course. [...] a name I knew wizards everywhere would one day fear to speak." --CoS ch 17 We know, then, that Voldemort has always allowed his closest supporters to hear his name. Might he not also allow them to speak it? Fake!Moody uses the name. Lucius Malfoy does not flinch when Dumbledore speaks it at the end of CoS. Several, but not *all* of the Death Eaters in the MoM hiss when Harry speaks it. Bella says, "You dare speak his name with your unworthy lips, you dare besmirch it with your half-blood's tongue, you dare--" (OOP ch 35) which sounds to me as if certain worthy, pure-blooded individuals are allowed to use it. She does not flinch when she hears it from Harry's lips again in chapter 36. As usual, it's possible to draw contradictory conclusions from all this, in no particular order. 1) It's a Flint. JKR is sloppy and doesn't always show the Death Eaters flinching from the name or fearing to use it. 2) It's a Clue. Voldemort's most loyal followers are allowed to use the name, as a mark of favor, or to mislead the enemy. In that case, no one can be elimated from consideration as a hidden Death Eater by their willingness to use the name. Pippin From naama_gat at hotmail.com Thu Nov 11 14:48:37 2004 From: naama_gat at hotmail.com (naamagatus) Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 14:48:37 -0000 Subject: DD's respect for Snape (Was: Unreliable narrator - The Snape Timeline In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117618 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "nrenka" wrote: > >> > I'd feel remiss in not posting the continuation, since the two parts are so much more interesting when put together: > > "My memory is as good as it ever was, Severus," said Dumbledore > quietly. > > This smacks of a reminder of some sort, and I'm not quite sure what > to do with it. It doesn't come across as dismissive per se, but I > can't help but feeling it as something of a rebuke--'You and I both > know what actually happened', with perhaps the continuation 'and it's not what matters now even though it was awful', OR perhaps 'and you know that's not what really went on'. > > For my own largely unsupported two cents, I feel some definite >quasi-paternal vibes coming from Dumbledore towards Snape, but on the >other hand, I think Dumbledore must also know what Snape is capable >of and tries to keep him reined in, even inject a little humor and >levity into his life. No idea if it's taken at all. I've interpreted it differently: Snape is reminding him of something awful that Sirius has done; I think that DD is reminding him that he (Snape) has also done awful things in the past. "My memory is as good as ever, Severus" - meaning, I remember everything, not just what Sirius had done. Telling Snape, basically, that it's not in his best interests to insist on rememberance of past wrongdoings. Naama From foxmoth at qnet.com Thu Nov 11 14:56:31 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 14:56:31 -0000 Subject: DD's respect for Snape (Was: Unreliable narrator - The Snape Timeline In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117619 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "potioncat" wrote: > > snipping here and there > >> > Potioncat > "You haven't forgotten that, Headmaster? You > > > haven't forgotten that he once tried to kill *me*?" > > > > > >>>Nora: > > > "My memory is as good as it ever was, Severus," said Dumbledore quietly.<< > Potioncat: > I have to agree. The two men know exactly what they are talking about, but we do not. It also sounds the way an adult child talks to an elderly parent who is losing his/her memory.(Although I don't think that is JKR's intent at all. Just my own personal life intruding)< Pippin: I think the memory loss implications are absolutely intentional. Rita Skeeter refers Dumbledore as "an obsolete dingbat" in print within a month or two of this conversation, and a year later, people will be convinced that Dumbledore has lost his marbles. It's a good bet such rumors are already circulating. Dumbledore is saying, "Don't *you* start." Pippin From willsonkmom at msn.com Thu Nov 11 15:12:38 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 15:12:38 -0000 Subject: A few random puzzles In-Reply-To: <9qt5f4+lah6@eGroups.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117620 My timeturner must have slipped, because I found myself reading this very old post. It didn't generate much discussion at the time, but I was taken with it for some reason. So here it is with my comments as well. I think GoF had come out? (Forgot to check on that date) but OoP had not. (not being good at dates and math, I could be wrong.) >>>In Oct 2001 Cindy wrote > Here are a few things that came to mind: > > 1. In PS/SS, Vernon insults Dumbledore, and Hagrid tries to turn > Dudley into a pig, giving him a pig tail that has to be surgically > removed. But why? If Vernon is the problem, why hex an innocent > boy? Potioncat: In the medium which not be named, Dudley is stealing Harry's cake, but in canon, he's not doing anything. Did Hagrid just hex him because he exists? Are we seeing a long standing trend of bullying by Gryffindors? No, really, what is going on here? > >>>Cindy > 2. In PS/SS, Hagrid tells Harry about Gringotts. He says it is > guarded by "spells -- enchantments", with dragons guarding the >high-security vaults. As Bill is a curse-breaker and Charlie is a >dragon specialist, are the Weasleys going to break into Gringotts >in a future book? Potioncat: Well, Percy seems to have taken a bad turn, could be possible. But maybe there will be something going on that will require these two to team up? >>>Cindy > 3. In the Pensieve, Bertha Jorkins appears and delivers the >famous lines that have us all so baffled: "He put a hex on me, >Professor Dumbledore, and I was only teasing him, sir, I only said >I'd seen him kissing Florence behind the greenhouses last >Thursday . . . " "But why, Bertha," said Dumbledore sadly, >looking up at the now silently revolving girl, "why did you have >to follow him in the first place." > > For this Bertha Jorkins stuff to be important to make it into the > Pensieve and for Dumbledore to still be sad about it, >the "kissing" has to be more than garden-variety kissing. So I >wonder if Bertha saw Snape, who is half-dementor, administering >the Kiss to someone. Or maybe he is a vampire, and what Bertha >mistakes for a kiss is really a bite. > > Really, I apologize for bringing up point three again, and I know >it has been done to death, but who knows? Maybe we'll figure it >out if we give it just one more try? Potioncat: I don't think it was the kiss so much, but this idea would turn HP into a bodice ripper. Let's all pause to consider that.... Any way, IMHO the important thing was that Bertha was getting into trouble for poking her nose where it didn't belong...foreshadowing Harry's dive into Snape's borrowed Pensieve. Potioncat, hoping you enjoyed this little trip through time and wondering if Cindy is still with us? From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Thu Nov 11 15:25:04 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 15:25:04 -0000 Subject: DD's respect for Snape (Was: Unreliable narrator - The Snape Timeline In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117621 Ana: > Yes, but how much affection does Dumbledore display towards Minerva > (or even Hagrid)? I would think that after knowing Snape for more > than 20 years, Dumbledore would at least feel some affection towards > Snape (and not just tolerating him). Dumbledore also hid his > affection well from Harry..I think that much is obvious from the end > of book 5. Alla: I concede that you are correct - he does not SHOW much affection towards other teachers either and he must feel something towards Snape as person. I am just saying that the fact that Dumbledore constantly repeats that he trusts him, does not necessarily equals him liking Snape's behaviour towards Harry, I disagree that Dumbledore does not have affection towards Harry. If we were to think that he was telling the truth at the end of OOP, his love for the boy caused him to do all those things to him. You know, hide truth from Harry for as long as possible, etc. From kelly at protocallonline.com Thu Nov 11 15:39:02 2004 From: kelly at protocallonline.com (kellymcj2000) Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 15:39:02 -0000 Subject: Kreacher's bandages In-Reply-To: <001a01c4c7ca$8c683fa0$5ac2d0d8@homesfm01ywa7v> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117622 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Cathy Drolet" wrote: > Carol said: > "Has anyone noticed that Kreacher's hands are bandaged as if he has > just ironed them when Harry tries to contact Sirius Black using > Umbridge's fireplace (OoP Am. ed. 740)? Has he ironed them in advance > because he's in the process of betraying his master or because he has > just injured Buckbeak or . . . ? > > Ideas, anybody?" > > > DuffyPoo: > > I'd say it was injuries from Buckbeak. Kreacher had no loyalty to Sirius > but was forced to do as he asked because of enslavement to the family. I > doubt Kreacher would feel the need to iron his hands for betraying Sirius. Yes, his hands are bandaged and I think it's because he has just committed an act of betrayal by taking an order from a DE and injuring Buckbeak. BTW I started wondering about this entire series of events the last time I read the book. How does Kreacher know when to injure BB? There must have been some system in place to let him know. Obviously, Voldemort knows when Harry has had the dream. He can alert the DEs and someone can let Kreacher know it's time to hurt BB. How do they let Kreacher know though? Does he pop out of the house every hour or two? Seems unlikely. There must be a more efficient system. Do you think they gave him a dark mark? Also, do you think Kreacher knew about the two way mirror and perhaps took it so Harry couldn't contact Sirius that way? Perhaps the DEs 're-wired' it so they could use it with Kreacher. If Kreacher took it early enough, that may explain why Sirius didn't ask Harry why he didn't use the mirror when he wanted to talk about James. Perhaps the mirror had disappeared and Sirius thought he'd misplaced it or that Kreacher destroyed it. If he knew it was gone, he may think Harry'd already tried that method and resorted to the floo network when the mirror didn't work. JKR did say the mirror wouldn't have been as useful as we'd have thought. Maybe that's why. Maybe not. Thoughts? kmc From nrenka at yahoo.com Thu Nov 11 15:48:10 2004 From: nrenka at yahoo.com (nrenka) Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 15:48:10 -0000 Subject: DD's respect for Snape (Was: Unreliable narrator - The Snape Timeline In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117623 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "pippin_999" wrote: > >> Nora: >> >> "My memory is as good as it ever was, Severus," said >> Dumbledore quietly. > Pippin: > I think the memory loss implications are absolutely intentional. > Rita Skeeter refers Dumbledore as "an obsolete dingbat" in > print within a month or two of this conversation, and a year later, > people will be convinced that Dumbledore has lost his marbles. > It's a good bet such rumors are already circulating. Dumbledore > is saying, "Don't *you* start." Oh, but there really has to be more to it than that. What's so frustrating is that it's pretty obvious that comment is made and being taken on a number of different levels, and I don't think we're privy yet to all of the implications. I'm tempted now (at this time of the day, and in a near homicidal rage at the people who won't stop yapping in the library :) to, ummm, try to read it in light of What We Knew Then and What We Know Now, which makes the 'second chances' an ironic theme, and a strong one. That is to say, it's ironic that Snape is so dead set on a particular personal injury from the past, and insistent that no second chances be given in this case (I stand by my reading of the timeline and his comments to Fudge about Dumbledore as following *upon* this discussion, although I know it's not clear), as we at this point do not know about Snape's own offenses and the gift of a second chance granted to him. [I'll be charitable and not ponder further extrapolations here.] So, the point of this comment might be primarily "I gave you one, don't whine when some other ones get given out". But I can't quite shake the feeling that it's also some kind of direct commentary upon the perception/actuality split of what happened with the 'murder attempt/schoolboy prank/god only knows what it was'. With the overlaying comment of "You *know* that I know what I'm doing, Severus..." No, she wouldn't answer any questions relating to this issue, would she... -Nora really, really wants the ability to Silencio! people right about NOW From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Thu Nov 11 15:54:33 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 15:54:33 -0000 Subject: DD's respect for Snape (Was: Unreliable narrator - The Snape Timeline In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117624 Nora: > So, the point of this comment might be primarily "I gave you one, > don't whine when some other ones get given out". But I can't quite > shake the feeling that it's also some kind of direct commentary upon > the perception/actuality split of what happened with the 'murder > attempt/schoolboy prank/god only knows what it was'. With the > overlaying comment of "You *know* that I know what I'm doing, > Severus..." Alla: Like it is possible that Dumbledore remembers some of Snape's not very honorable behaviour towards Marauders, which we are not privy yet? No, I am telling you it is NOT possible. Snape was innocent ALWAYS. Whatever we may learn in the future will only put Snape in the even better light as the only victim and will put Marauders in even worse light. :o) From drjuliehoward at yahoo.com Thu Nov 11 15:55:56 2004 From: drjuliehoward at yahoo.com (fanofminerva) Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 15:55:56 -0000 Subject: Apparition lessons (was Re: Draco's POV?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117625 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "quigonginger" wrote: > > Steve (bboyminn) wrote: > > Or how about just stepping outside the front gate to practice > Apparating. > > > > Student are not legally allowed to /do/ any kind of magic outside of > > school; Apparation is no different. Given that Apparation is > > dangerous, I have to believe it will be an in-school, but off > grounds > > class taught by some one with expertise in the matter. > (really big snip) > > Ginger: > Perhaps there is an apparation range, so to speak. Kind of like a > driving range. > > Back home there is a road that is never used since the Interstate > went in. Everyone just went up there to teach their kids how to > drive. It was just common knowledge that if you saw another vehicle, > you pulled over until it passed because the driver was a 12 or 13 > year old. (We get licenses at 14 here.) We had drivers ed at school, > but it was kind of a joke- a simulator. Real practice was needed, > with a permit usually. > > So back to Hogwarts. If there was a Ministry-approved peice of land > right outside the gates set aside for that purpose, it would be out > of school, but wouldn't fall under the prohibition of using magic > outside of school. Kind of like that nasty parking lot with the > cones we had to drive through to get our license. The method is > taught, they practice over a short distance, and then the students > use those skills to increase their distance on their own. > > Ginger, recalling fond memories of teaching Baby Sister to drive. > "Clutch! Shift! Let out! Not so ...oh, drat" What about the Room of Requirements? If someone needed to apparate inside of Hogwart's, could this room meet that requirement? If so, that opens up so much speculation (e.g., Snape's travels at the end of Book 4, etc.). Any opinions? Julie From boyd.t.smythe at fritolay.com Thu Nov 11 16:37:46 2004 From: boyd.t.smythe at fritolay.com (Smythe, Boyd T {FLNA}) Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 10:37:46 -0600 Subject: Inside Harry's mind Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117626 Kneasy wrote: > It's likely that Voldy sees an unprotected Harry as a Trojan Horse and yes, he could see it as a way to get behind the defences of both Hogwarts and the Order. He's made a first try with trying to get Harry to attack DD. Of course, if he was a really Machiavellian type of villain his most effective ploy could be to influence Harry to do nothing, to opt out of the fight. That would leave DD in a hell of a mess. < boyd: Nice thought, but if the Voldmeister could really control Harry *some*, why wouldn't Jo just have LV eventually gain control of Harry *entirely* for a brief period of time--perhaps when he's already despairing over something else. Fun! And, I say, bring on the deaths! It'd make for great writing and reading--and lots more emotional strain on poor Harry--if LV took him over, had Harry's body kill someone (Colin?) in front of witnesses, then left Harry to fend for himself against the powers-that-be. Poor Harry'd have to run, go into hiding, or perhaps just be locked up. And if he were temporarily on the run from the whole MoM/WW, including aurors, teachers and friends, that'd be deliciously horrible. Thanks, Kneasy, I like your idea. At least it'd be one good way to inject some over-the-top banginess into HBP without violating what we already know. Plus, it'd force Harry to decide to save the WW despite its hatred of him--a potentially nice bit of plot development that'd get toward making Harry the hero we all hope for. --boyd enjoying yet another subversive idea from the inimitable Kneasy From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com Thu Nov 11 17:37:43 2004 From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (arrowsmithbt) Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 17:37:43 -0000 Subject: Inside Harry's mind In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117627 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Smythe, Boyd T {FLNA}" wrote: > > Nice thought, but if the Voldmeister could really control Harry *some*, why > wouldn't Jo just have LV eventually gain control of Harry *entirely* for a > brief period of time--perhaps when he's already despairing over something > else. Fun! And, I say, bring on the deaths! > > It'd make for great writing and reading--and lots more emotional strain on > poor Harry--if LV took him over, had Harry's body kill someone (Colin?) in > front of witnesses, then left Harry to fend for himself against the > powers-that-be. Poor Harry'd have to run, go into hiding, or perhaps just be > locked up. And if he were temporarily on the run from the whole MoM/WW, > including aurors, teachers and friends, that'd be deliciously horrible. > > Thanks, Kneasy, I like your idea. At least it'd be one good way to inject > some over-the-top banginess into HBP without violating what we already know. > Plus, it'd force Harry to decide to save the WW despite its hatred of him--a > potentially nice bit of plot development that'd get toward making Harry the > hero we all hope for. > Well, we both have an active (some would say over-active) imagination and a desire for blood-boultered mayhem, but regretfully I can't see Jo allowing Harry to be elbow deep in the tripes of some poor innocent. Not that I can't come up with a list of names deserving the ultimate sanction - no doubt you can too. Ah, well, maybe in a TBAY. Luna stalking the beach as the WW's only surviving brain transplant donor, perhaps. But it's possible that somebody close to Harry may snuff it as an unintended consequence of Harry's actions or inactions. Plenty of angst and remorse. Might get him to smarten up his act. But certainly the possible lack of restraint on the fragment of Voldy that is already there - well, it does give one hope for some truly nasty happenings. He could move into Slytherin for a start. Then he could eventually see the error of his ways and become the 'good' Slytherin that everybody has been waiting for. Kneasy From nrenka at yahoo.com Thu Nov 11 18:02:17 2004 From: nrenka at yahoo.com (nrenka) Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 18:02:17 -0000 Subject: Inside Harry's mind In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117628 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "arrowsmithbt" wrote: > possible lack of restraint on the fragment of Voldy that > is already there - well, it does give one hope for some truly nasty > happenings. He could move into Slytherin for a start. Then he > could eventually see the error of his ways and become the 'good' > Slytherin that everybody has been waiting for. This isn't quite on-thread, but I have a question that relates to the general premise, and maybe some thoughts for its bases... Why a 'fragment' of Voldie, which assumes some sort of essential transfer (and a division of 'what is voldie and what is harry'), and not something like an impression left *by* Voldie on something that is and was originally Harry? [My sick sad mind wants to equate it with the differences between musical imitation and representation, but let's ignore that.] I am in the camp that believes Harry had some sort of natural talents from the get go, although with the Prophecy, it is of course ambiguous whether the 'one with the power' was that before he was 'marked as the Dark Lord's equal' or not...but the wording seems to imply that there was something *there* beforehand, to be marked. You can't make an impression in air, after all. But the impression/influence argument, that the stuff of Harry was somehow shaped/changed by the stuff of Voldie, without a piece of the other stuff necessarily being left behind (as a separate entity)...I think it's worth consideration. This is getting into Rowling's metaphysics, which are exceedingly obscure at present. "Why didn't Voldemort die?" asks some questions that we have spotty background to try to answer, IMHO. Not that that should or would ever stop us from trying... -Nora ponders the issues of representation, imitation, interpretation, realization...(with figured bass) From dk59us at yahoo.com Thu Nov 11 18:11:03 2004 From: dk59us at yahoo.com (Eustace_Scrubb) Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 18:11:03 -0000 Subject: hero or Hero? (was Re: Is Harry feeling guilty for being alive?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117629 Alla: > > Yes, me too, me too, but I have to say - I sympathise with Harry > sygnificantly more than I did with Aragorn. It is due to the fact > that when I first saw Aragorn he is an adult, who came to terms with > his destiny and Harry is a normal (or not exactly normal) child who > gets stuck with his Destiny and struggles to accept it right in > front of my eyes. Eustace_Scrubb: I absolutely agree and again it's not just because we're seeing Harry at the age that he's finding out why he's special, which is backstory for Aragorn in LOTR. It's also because we see so much of it from Harry's own POV, while Aragorn's feelings are rarely discussed by the rather formal and distant narration of LOTR. Aragorn's not really there to sympathize with, while Harry definitely is. Aragorn's a hero, _not_ The Hero of LOTR. Harry, while not the only hero of JKR's series, _is_ The Hero, if there is to be one. Cheers, Eustace_Scrubb From distaiyi at yahoo.com Thu Nov 11 18:37:38 2004 From: distaiyi at yahoo.com (distaiyi) Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 18:37:38 -0000 Subject: arthur weasley In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117630 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "kellymcj2000" wrote: > > Did anyone ever find the significance of Arthur being one of three > brothers or of Ginny being the first girl in several generations? > Is there some legend somewhere about when a daughter is born to one > of three brothers xxxxxxxx will happen? Or anything about girls > popping up in families of all boys? Not able to find exactly what you're looking for but... According to ancient western myth the seventh son of the seventh son or the seventh daughter of the seventh daughter is said to possess supernatural powers. You'll find this mentioned in several places in the Bible, but the legend dates back to prehistoric times, and is known across many cultures and religions. Seven also represents the thinker, the seeker of truth, someone who is always in search of answers. Other Mythologies indicate the Seventh Son is doomed to Vampirism, Werewolfism, while the 7th daughter would be a Witch. If I recall correctly Dracul was a 7th son of a 7th son. The seventh son of the seventh son was said to have enhanced psychic powers and be and advanced dream analyser acording to folklore In Cornwall, it was believed that the seventh son of a seventh son was able to touch-cure the disease. The seventh son of a seventh son was widely believed in the British Isles to have all kinds of powers. From manawydan at ntlworld.com Thu Nov 11 18:58:22 2004 From: manawydan at ntlworld.com (manawydan) Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 18:58:22 -0000 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Muggle World (Was: Quills) References: <1100151878.3014.13395.m25@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <001901c4c820$6c6232a0$704b6d51@f3b7j4> No: HPFGUIDX 117631 >>Carol wrote >>I still think the closest equivalent is the academic gowns worn by >>students at Oxford--not the modern version but the one that was worn >>from the thirteenth through the nineteenth centuries to distinguish >>the students (and faculty)from the ordinary townspeople--Town and >>Gown. >Potioncat: >Where would the rest of us find a picture or description of that? Here's a catalogue with some of them in http://www.shepherdandwoodward.co.uk/acatalog/sitemap.html and a description of all of them http://www.all-science-fair-projects.com/science_fair_projects_encyclopedia/Academic_dress_of_Oxford_University (takes me back a good few years!) I also had a mental picture of something like Oxbridge gowns when I read about Hogwarts robes, though (from having worn a commoner's gown) it wouldn't keep you very warm (or modest) without something underneath. Possibly they are somewhat more "monkish" and all-enveloping. Also interesting to speculate whether the idea of having different ceremonial gowns also applies in the WW: whether Madam Malkin has a catalogue of patterns for the purpose... Cheers Ffred O Benryn wleth hyd Luch Reon Cymru yn unfryd gerhyd Wrion Gwret dy Cymry yghymeiri From ladyramkin2000 at yahoo.co.uk Thu Nov 11 19:04:07 2004 From: ladyramkin2000 at yahoo.co.uk (ladyramkin2000) Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 19:04:07 -0000 Subject: A few random puzzles Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117632 Potioncat quotes Cindy: "I wonder if Bertha saw Snape who is half-dementor, administering the Kiss to someone" Half-dementor!!! This is worse than the Snape-is-a-vampire theme. The implication that some woman had sex with a dementor is too horrible to contemplate. Sylvia (who hopes we will eventually find out who Florence really was snogging) From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com Thu Nov 11 19:27:39 2004 From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (arrowsmithbt) Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 19:27:39 -0000 Subject: Inside Harry's mind In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117633 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "nrenka" wrote: > > Why a 'fragment' of Voldie, which assumes some sort of essential > transfer (and a division of 'what is voldie and what is harry'), and > not something like an impression left *by* Voldie on something that > is and was originally Harry? > Kneasy: Mostly because Harry saying "So Voldy put a bit of himself in me?" followed by DD's confirmation does not lend itself to having left a mere impression. The implication is of something more substantial. > Nora: > I am in the camp that believes Harry had some sort of natural talents > from the get go, although with the Prophecy, it is of course > ambiguous whether the 'one with the power' was that before he > was 'marked as the Dark Lord's equal' or not...but the wording seems > to imply that there was something *there* beforehand, to be marked. > > You can't make an impression in air, after all. > Kneasy: But if it's not an impression, if, as canon suggests, it is a part of Voldy.... Under such circumstances even Dudders would be a super-wizard. Now if you want to argue that it's just an impression, then fine. But find some canon to back it please.. From jferer at yahoo.com Thu Nov 11 19:35:29 2004 From: jferer at yahoo.com (Jim Ferer) Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 19:35:29 -0000 Subject: Apparition lessons (was Re: Draco's POV?) In-Reply-To: <20041111020855.22258.qmail@web53104.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117634 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Juli wrote: > > --- Jim Ferer wrote: > > Madame Hooch: "Is everyone here? Very well, we'll be > > walking down to Hogsmeade so that we can practice > > Apparating and Disapparating, but before we begin, > > understand that those of you under the age of 17 are > > not permitted to do it on your own before you are 17 > > years old and have passed the official Ministry test." > > Juli: > But how can you pass a test if you've nerver studied > it before? Maybe while at Hogsmeade they are taught > how to apparate, the basics, like from Zonko's to the > Hog's Head. They kids seem to take their test during > the summer after they turn 17, so between the time > they turn 17 and the summer they learn how to. Hooch is telling the students that they're about to get lessons, but don't try it until they've taken the test. The no magic out of school rule won't apply while taking an official school class under a Hogwarts teacher. From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Thu Nov 11 19:42:27 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 19:42:27 -0000 Subject: The Riddles' Murders (WAS: The only one he ever feared? In-Reply-To: <20041110181359.1577.qmail@web53108.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117635 Magda wrote: The WW doesn't seem to have much in the way of policing or > regular monitoring even now. In earlier days I suppose there was > even less activity. The emphasis of wizard government seems to be > protecting wizards from muggles and allowing them to be secluded and > protected from prying eyes. Tom Riddle was able to take advantage of these gaps and commit murder almost with impunity. Carol responds: *Almost*? Carol, winning the award (or the ire of the List Elves) for shortest post From annemehr at yahoo.com Thu Nov 11 19:47:54 2004 From: annemehr at yahoo.com (annemehr) Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 19:47:54 -0000 Subject: Inside Harry's mind In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117636 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "nrenka" wrote: > Why a 'fragment' of Voldie, which assumes some sort of essential > transfer (and a division of 'what is voldie and what is harry'), and > not something like an impression left *by* Voldie on something that > is and was originally Harry? Annemehr: Along that line, Harry's scar is just that sort of thing: the impression left by Voldything and his AK on Harry's face. It would be easy enough to extrapolate to what you are saying. I wonder just what LV may have left his impression *on,* exactly -- Harry's mind only? His soul (however you define that)? His whatever-it-is-that- makes-him-magic (which has made him a Parselmouth)? Or has he affected Harry's whole being? Back in CoS, DD explained that LV "transferred some of his own powers to you the night he gave you that scar. Not something he intended to do, I'm sure..." To which Harry replied "Voldemort put a bit of himself in /me/?" DD's answer: "It certainly seems so." That's all we have to go on. Transferring powers seems like a limited effect; nothing at all to worry about, more of an advantage, really. Harry's interpretation (always murky ground, eh?) is that some, what, *essence* of Voldemort went into Harry. DD doesn't contradict him, but that doesn't mean much to me, since we know he's skirting around unspoken truths and may not even know much for sure. If Nora's right, it could still give Harry some vulnerabilities to Voldemort, like a "back door" left in the software. It doesn't seem quite as dangerous as an embedded bit of him would, though. > boyd: > > but if the Voldmeister could really control Harry *some*, why > wouldn't Jo just have LV eventually gain control of Harry *entirely* for a > brief period of time--perhaps when he's already despairing over something > else. Fun! And, I say, bring on the deaths! Annemehr: Well, he did try that, in the MoM. It seemed to be working perfectly well, but then he got the boot. If LV tried to get Harry to murder someone, would Harry's emotions save the day again? Harry might not know what was going on, though -- when he was possessed, he was aware of Voldemort and only Voldemort -- what he said through Harry's mouth. Harry was apparently completely unaware of falling and losing his glasses, and of whatever Dumbeldore may have been doing at the time. Back to Nora: > I am in the camp that believes Harry had some sort of natural talents > from the get go, Annemehr: Oh, me too! Absolutely. :) Nora: > But the impression/influence argument, that the stuff of Harry was > somehow shaped/changed by the stuff of Voldie, without a piece of the > other stuff necessarily being left behind (as a separate entity)...I > think it's worth consideration. > > This is getting into Rowling's metaphysics, which are exceedingly > obscure at present. Annemehr: Yes, as long as it's a strong enough influence. There's that connection between them, after all, which allowed Harry to begin seeing what LV was doing as soon as LV arrived in Britain (hey, there's a bit of a need of proximity for you: surely LV had strong emotions in Albania when Wormtail and Bertha arrived, and when he first got the ugly-baby body. Yet, nothing does Harry see until they're both on the same island). You're darn right about "obscure." There's no way that I can see to choose between one model and the other at present. Interesting, though. Annemehr From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com Thu Nov 11 20:01:05 2004 From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (arrowsmithbt) Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 20:01:05 -0000 Subject: A few random puzzles In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117637 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "potioncat" wrote: > > My timeturner must have slipped, because I found myself reading this > very old post. > > >>>In Oct 2001 Cindy wrote > > Here are a few things that came to mind: > > > > 1. In PS/SS, Vernon insults Dumbledore, and Hagrid tries to turn > > Dudley into a pig, giving him a pig tail that has to be surgically > > removed. But why? If Vernon is the problem, why hex an innocent > > boy? > > Potioncat: > In the medium which not be named, Dudley is stealing Harry's cake, > but in canon, he's not doing anything. Did Hagrid just hex him > because he exists? Are we seeing a long standing trend of bullying > by Gryffindors? No, really, what is going on here? Kneasy: Usual WW stuff, I think. Despite all the thousands of posts on the subject since the site started, nobody has ever managed to demonstrate that the WW is 'fair' or moral in a way that is congruent with the Real World. In fact it manifestly isn't. Power counts. Over Muggles, Elves, other beings, other wizards. The competitors in the TWT are told "it's usual to cheat"; family arguments end up with the losers at St Mungo's having hexes or worse removed. Mostly the rule seems to be - do what you like, if you can get away with it. Unless of course, in this particular instance it's a foreshadowing - shades of things to come. Nobody turned up called Circe, have they? > > > >>>Cindy > > 2. In PS/SS, Hagrid tells Harry about Gringotts. He says it is > > guarded by "spells -- enchantments", with dragons guarding the > >high-security vaults. As Bill is a curse-breaker and Charlie is a > >dragon specialist, are the Weasleys going to break into Gringotts > >in a future book? > > Potioncat: > Well, Percy seems to have taken a bad turn, could be possible. But > maybe there will be something going on that will require these two > to team up? Kneasy: Ummm. I did once pen a TBAY where Bill was ripping off the Bank to retain the interest of a girl with very expensive tastes - Mlle. Delacorte. But that was mere whimsy. You know, there could be something in this Bill/Charlie thing, Raffles and Bunty, doing something technically criminal but in a good cause. After all, there must be a reason for the swarms of Weasleys cluttering up the background. Apart from constituting a significant fraction of the casualty list. Might as well do something useful before they join the choir invisible. > > >>>Cindy > > 3. In the Pensieve, Bertha Jorkins appears and delivers the > >famous lines that have us all so baffled: "He put a hex on me, > >Professor Dumbledore, and I was only teasing him, sir, I only said > >I'd seen him kissing Florence behind the greenhouses last > >Thursday . . . " "But why, Bertha," said Dumbledore sadly, > >looking up at the now silently revolving girl, "why did you have > >to follow him in the first place." > > > > For this Bertha Jorkins stuff to be important to make it into the > > Pensieve and for Dumbledore to still be sad about it, > >the "kissing" has to be more than garden-variety kissing. So I > >wonder if Bertha saw Snape, who is half-dementor, administering > >the Kiss to someone. Or maybe he is a vampire, and what Bertha > >mistakes for a kiss is really a bite. > > > Potioncat: > I don't think it was the kiss so much, but this idea would turn HP > into a bodice ripper. Let's all pause to consider that.... > > > Any way, IMHO the important thing was that Bertha was getting into > trouble for poking her nose where it didn't belong...foreshadowing > Harry's dive into Snape's borrowed Pensieve. > Kneasy: Shame on you. You haven't been reading my back posts. Tsk, tsk. Well, lean closer and I'll let you into a secret - just so long as you promise not to spread it around. Florence and Snape. Yes. But it got even more intense. You know that memory, the arguing couple and the child? That was chez Snape - Sevvy and Flo, plus Snape!Son. It was what happened to them that made him leave Voldy, you know. Terribly sad. Never got over it. Always quarreling, but some couples are like that; but let anybody else poke their noses in and there's hell to pay. > Potioncat, hoping you enjoyed this little trip through time and > wondering if Cindy is still with us? Kneasy Ah. No. The Poster Who Must Not Be Named. From bboyminn at yahoo.com Thu Nov 11 20:14:23 2004 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 20:14:23 -0000 Subject: Muggle World - Wizard Robes In-Reply-To: <20041106015733.10816.qmail@web53108.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117638 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Juli wrote: > > Juli now: > ...edited... > > ... it just doesn't feel right, just like wearing jeans under the > robes. Besides, I don't think the robes are anything like a > judge's, in GoF Fleur says she won't be able to fit in her gown, which > means they aren't so wide as to make you feel like a nun, they must > have some shape. > > Juli - wondering why she's thought so much about wizard clothes bboyminn: We discussed wizard robes and period costumes in the past, but it's been a long time, so here is a suggestion - search Google for 'medieval wizard robes' and you will come across an amazing number of links (10,000 actually). Like links to- Simplicity Sewing Patters - sew your own. http://www.simplicity.com/index.cfm?cat=4&type=19&sec=0&id=59&startrow=1 Simplicity example - Adult Wizard Robes http://www.simplicity.com/design.cfm?designId=10706&design=9753 Simplicity example - Adult Medieval Robe http://www.simplicity.com/design.cfm?designId=10419&design=5925 Medieval Weapons Arts - Monk's Robe http://www.mwart.com/xq/ASP/pid.1127/cat.139/qx/product.htm Order Of Merlin - Harry Potter Costumes http://www.orderofmerlin.com/generic3.html I think the Adult robes in the books are very closee to the classic fairytale wizard robes and close to the adult wizard robes in the movie. However, I think it's reasonable for the kid's school wizard robes to have been modified and somewhat modernized over time. So, while they do resemble classic wizard robes, they are really just an over/outer-robe similar to but not quite as modern as those seen in the movie. I suspect that clothing worn in the implied era was made of many layers because it was very difficult to heat castles and other medieval buildings. Consequently, it would have been reasonable for the outer wizard's robe that we see to conceal a lighter underrobe, which concealed some type of underclothing or tights. I guess my point is that modern wizard kids and the official school robes would have been more of an outer covering for the sake of tradition and the underclothing would have been somewhat normal by modern standards. Difficult to say with any real degree of accuracy. This being fiction, and fiction being moldable to the author's will and the reader's fancy, I can certainly see JKR intending the robes to be a very simplified versions of the fancy robes wizards are seen to wear in fantasy books and artwork with those magical themes. Since wizards are fiction, wizard robes are mostly based on fantasy with just a trace of reality thrown in. Other good themes to persue in Google searches would be things like 'costumes wizard robes' or 'Medieval wizard costumes' or 'fantasy costumes', etc.... http://www.authenticwardrobe.com/Wizards_Witches/wizards_witches.html http://www.silvermane.com/MR/MR-8312.html Garb World - Monks Robes http://www.garbtheworld.com/pgs/robes.shtml I think a somewhat more simplified version of these monks robes would be close to what JKR intended the Howarts robes to look like. Just a few fun link for those who are interested. Steve/bboyminn (was bboy_mn) From annemehr at yahoo.com Thu Nov 11 20:25:10 2004 From: annemehr at yahoo.com (annemehr) Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 20:25:10 -0000 Subject: Inside Harry's mind In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117639 > Kneasy: > But if it's not an impression, if, as canon suggests, it is a part of Voldy.... > Under such circumstances even Dudders would be a super-wizard. Annemehr: Whoa! I don't think we can go as far as to say that he had such a huge effect on Harry. Dumbledore did say LV transferred *some* of his powers. Apparently [she said dryly] he did not transfer to Harry the power to charm the people he needed. We're not sure if "some of his powers" means only certain individual talents (such as Parseltongue), or also a general increase in magical ability. But to me, "some" doesn't even mean as much as "most." I seemed to have been working on my previous post at the same time you were doing yours, and in it I explained why I thought we should be careful about interpreting Harry's words about a bit of Volemort. The possibilities are endless, but the conclusion can be few. I'm perfectly happy to explore their implications, but I'm not betting any real money on any of them. Annemehr From antoshachekhonte at yahoo.com Thu Nov 11 20:45:31 2004 From: antoshachekhonte at yahoo.com (antoshachekhonte) Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 20:45:31 -0000 Subject: Brain room In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117640 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "potioncat" wrote: > > > > > kjirstem: > > > > I found this the most disturbing room of the lot, I kept thinking > that > > Harry was going to find a label saying "Harry Potter" on the vat. > > After all, he has that scar. (And what's inside his head then? > > Marshmallow fluff? ) Like Maddy I was most bothered by the brains > > seeming alive. Some of the things I wonder about are whether they > > were obtained with their owners consent and what their existence > in a > > vat means for those owners. Can they be "properly dead" if their > > brains are alive? > > > > As for who they are or used to be, maybe they're puppetmasters > > controlling the Wizarding World....or maybe they are just the WW > > equivalent of data backup. > > Potioncat: > It reminded me of the old Frankenstein movies. And then it remined > me of "Igor" taking "Abby Normal's" brain after smashing the good > brain (Young Frankenstein) > > But I still think it was a Think Tank. Except the brains didn't > seem very nice. Well, I must say, many think tanks seem less than nice. :-) I think the less literal approach is probably better here. I don't think that those were actual brains from actual people. They were some sort of of manifestation of the mystery being studied in that room. We have to assume that the mystery involved is Thought, right? From pixieberry at charter.net Thu Nov 11 20:53:51 2004 From: pixieberry at charter.net (Krystol Berry) Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 12:53:51 -0800 Subject: Filk: AK in the UK Message-ID: <01bc01c4c830$8db0b4d0$6e64a8c0@D55NTV31> No: HPFGUIDX 117641 Beautifully done, Ginger! I couldn't ask for a better gift. :) Pixieberry (who is 28 today...did you hear it's my birthday?) [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Thu Nov 11 20:55:27 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 20:55:27 -0000 Subject: The Riddles' Murders (WAS: The only one he ever feared? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117642 Kim wrote: > But even in light of the facts > you pointed out, with Quirrell returning as a DADA teacher who's now > scared of his own shadow (but faking it, mind you), don't you think > it would have made sense to interview him to find out what happened > to make him so jumpy and whether he's even up to the job anymore? (or did they? -- I'd better go back and re-read that part of the book) > Of course, he'd have lied about it, but can't Dumbledore tell a liar > when he sees one? I do realize it's supposed to be hard to find > DADA teachers, so shear desperation may be the only explanation for > letting Quirrell have the post again. I mean, that explains Lockhart getting the job (well, kind of)! Another thing (that someone else probably pointed out already) is that the DADA teachers all seem to turn out to be Dark Arts Defense lessons in themselves, far more so than the defense skills they try to pass on in class. Not sure if Dumbledore intends this to happen or not. In any case, I still think the WW is pretty lax about security, considering what LV put them through before, but then it's not a perfect world either, is it? Again, a perfect world would be dull, dull, dull. Carol responds: Quirrell would have gotten his job back automatically after his leave of absence (though that begs the question of what happened to the person who taught DADA for the year Quirrell was gone and how that fits in with the supposed jinx on the position). Since he wasn't interviewed for the position, it's possible that Dumbledore had very little direct contact with him. You don't look into the eyes of a person sitting farther down the table from you while you're dining, and Quirrell, being "timid," may have been virtually silent at staff meetings, especially if he knew that DD was a legilimens. (BTW, the timidity wasn't all a pretense, IMO. He was terrified of Voldemort, at least until he had successfully overcome the obstacles to get to the Sorceror's stone, at which point we see the real post-corruption Quirrell. All he had to do was channel that terror so that it appeared to have a different cause, as when he fainted after reporting the troll.) Dumbledore may have wondered about the change in Quirrell's behavior and about the mysterious turban, but he probably trusted Snape to keep an eye on Quirrell (for reasons of his own as well as loyalty to Dumbledore) and would not even need to ask. Dumbledore himself observes and waits, as with Crouch!Moody, who also must have raised his suspicions. ("Innocent until proven guilty, Severus," as DD says in a different context.) IIRC, Snape, during the first Occlumency lesson, mentions a number of magical protections placed on Hogwarts. What are these protections and why don't they detect impostors and parasites within people's heads? You'd think Dumbledore would have something like a very subtle sneakoscope (one that didn't make a lot of noise that others could hear) to help him to identify an enemy within the walls, yet Pettigrew as Scabbers hid safely in Gryffindor Tower for twelve years. The only protections that we actually know of are the inability of wizards to apparate/disapparate within Hogwarts or its grounds and the Muggle-repelling spell that makes it look like an unsafe and uninviting old ruin to their eyes. But there are supposedly secret passageways leading into and out of the castle, not to mention some sort of underwater portal that allows a ship to arrive from Durmstrang unseen. What are those other protections and how do they protect the weak spots? (Flitwick taught the doors to recognize Sirius Black, but what about enemies who don't use the door or haven't been specified?) Carol, wondering why so many posts aren't threading From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com Thu Nov 11 20:55:33 2004 From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (arrowsmithbt) Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 20:55:33 -0000 Subject: Inside Harry's mind In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117643 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "annemehr" wrote: > > > > Kneasy: > > But if it's not an impression, if, as canon suggests, it is a part > of Voldy.... > > Under such circumstances even Dudders would be a super-wizard. > > Annemehr: > Whoa! I don't think we can go as far as to say that he had such a huge > effect on Harry. Dumbledore did say LV transferred *some* of his > powers. Apparently [she said dryly] he did not transfer to Harry the > power to charm the people he needed. We're not sure if "some of his > powers" means only certain individual talents (such as Parseltongue), > or also a general increase in magical ability. But to me, "some" > doesn't even mean as much as "most." > > I seemed to have been working on my previous post at the same time you > were doing yours, and in it I explained why I thought we should be > careful about interpreting Harry's words about a bit of Volemort. The > possibilities are endless, but the conclusion can be few. I'm > perfectly happy to explore their implications, but I'm not betting any > real money on any of them. > Ah. But. On the other hand and taking all things into consideration, is it possible for unattached powers to exist? The way I look at it is if I said you can use my eyesight, but I keep my eyes. Wouldn't work. Magical skills are in and of the wizard that learns them IMO, otherwise they could just be inhaled in the classroom from a jar of 'magic'. But as we know it's bloody hard work learning spells, there is no short cut. Unless something that has *already* learned them takes up residence in your mind. You may not agree, but I'm taking "a bit of himself" literally. It's more than just powers, it's part of Voldy's spirit, mind, anima that's in there. And it's that anima that generates, or originally generated, the Voldy powers that Harry now has for himself. Kneasy From willsonkmom at msn.com Thu Nov 11 21:21:13 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 21:21:13 -0000 Subject: Consider the source was Re: A few random puzzles In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117644 > > Potioncat: > > In the medium which not be named, Dudley is stealing Harry's cake, > > but in canon, he's not doing anything. Did Hagrid just hex him > > because he exists? Are we seeing a long standing trend of bullying > > by Gryffindors? No, really, what is going on here? > > Kneasy: Kneasy wrote: > Usual WW stuff, I think. > Despite all the thousands of posts on the subject since the site started, nobody has ever managed to demonstrate that the WW is 'fair' or moral in a way that is congruent with the Real World. In fact it manifestly isn't. > Power counts. Over Muggles, Elves, other beings, other wizards. The > competitors in the TWT are told "it's usual to cheat"; family arguments end up with the losers at St Mungo's having hexes or worse removed. Potioncat: Well, you have a good point. However, consider who told Harry it is usual to cheat: Barty Crouch Jr. Was he telling the truth? As for family disturbances ending up with losers at St. Mungos, it happens at RW hospitals as well. Patients come in with injuries caused by RW versions of hexes administered by doting family members. I'd hate to think anyone would judge any of us by the local Emergency Room. > > > Kneasy: snip You know that memory, the arguing couple > and the child? That was chez Snape - Sevvy and Flo, plus Snape!Son. > It was what happened to them that made him leave Voldy, you know. > Terribly sad. Never got over it. Always quarreling, but some couples are like that; but let anybody else poke their noses in and there's hell to pay. Potioncat: Whether or not the memory we saw was Little Severus and his parents, or Young Family Man Severus, I think you are on to something. I'm sure there was a family that was destroyed by the Dark Lord himself. > From cldrolet at sympatico.ca Thu Nov 11 21:33:58 2004 From: cldrolet at sympatico.ca (Cathy Drolet) Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 16:33:58 -0500 Subject: Kreacher's bandages Message-ID: <001201c4c836$2820e490$3efbe2d1@homesfm01ywa7v> No: HPFGUIDX 117645 > DuffyPoo: > > I'd say it was injuries from Buckbeak. Kreacher had no loyalty to Sirius > but was forced to do as he asked because of enslavement to the family. I > doubt Kreacher would feel the need to iron his hands for betraying Sirius. kmc said: "Yes, his hands are bandaged and I think it's because he has just committed an act of betrayal by taking an order from a DE and injuring Buckbeak." DuffyPoo: I don't think the hands are bandaged because he had to punish himself over the betrayal, at all. I think Beaky bit him. I don't know why Beaky didn't eat him...would have saved all this trouble. ;) kmc said: "Also, do you think Kreacher knew about the two way mirror and perhaps took it so Harry couldn't contact Sirius that way? Perhaps the DEs 're-wired' it so they could use it with Kreacher." DuffyPoo: No, I don't think Kreacher knew anything about the mirror. It really doesn't matter, since Harry completely forgot about it. As JKR said on her website, it's the one time his curiosity didn't get the better of him. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Thu Nov 11 21:49:13 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 21:49:13 -0000 Subject: DD's respect for Snape (Was: Unreliable narrator - The Snape Timeline In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117646 > Alla wrote: > > Sorry, Carol, but that was not the argument of the initial post and > not mine. I was not challenging the fact that Dumbledore trusts Snape, but to trust the person and to LIKE the person is not the same thing. > Dumbledore's trust in Snape is indeed everywhere. He respects him as > loyal member of the Light forces. > > I don't remember any.examples of Dumbledore's "fatherly affection" > toward Snape I consider it to bemostly fandom creation. Carol responds: No need to apologize. At least we agree that Dumbledore trusts Snape even if we don't agree about the affection. I'll try to find some more examples of a fatherly attitude toward Snape, who is of course some 115 years younger than Dumbledore, when I get back from California (leaving tomorrow, returning Monday). > Alla wrote: > > > What do you make out of the ending of PoA , for example when > Dumbledore rather harshly stops Snape hysterics? > > ""You don't know Potter!" shrieked Snape. "he did it, I know he did > it-" > "That will do, Severus," said Dumbledore quietly. "Think about what > you are saying. This door had been locked since I left the ward ten > minutes ago. Madam Pomfrey, have these students left their beds?" > "Of course not!" said Madam Pomfrey, bristling. "I would have heard > them!" > "Well, there you have it, Severus," said Dumbledore calmly. > "Unless you are suggesting that Harry and Hermione are able to be in > two places in once, I am afraid I don't see any point in troubling > them further" - PoA, p.420, paperback. > > > To me, it looked like rather cruel mockery by Dumbledore, because I > think that all teachers know about time-turners, not just > McGonagall, so Dumbledore practically tells him what happened and > tells him to shut up. > Carol responds: Funny, I don't see it that way at all. He doesn't say, "Shut up, you fool!" "That will do, Severus," is pretty mild for the amount of anger Snape is showing. I think he's quite subtly telling Snape about the Time Turner, talking over the heads of Madam Pomfrey and Fudge, whom he doesn't trust to know about it. Far from insulting Snape, he's relying on his ability to instantly put two and two together. And it works. Carol, asking people not to "offlist" her until Monday at the earliest! From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Thu Nov 11 23:05:11 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 23:05:11 -0000 Subject: Why has DD never suggested Snape thank Harry? (Was: Why has DD never suggest In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117647 Alla wrote: See, I did not go as far > as Pippin to think that Snape's behavior at the end of book 5 could > be interpreted as him congratulating Harry, but I was ready to give > the man some credit for agreeing that Harry and Co do deserve points. > > BUT he indeed took those points away in the first place. Now I think > that he just did not want to lose face in front of Minerva, whom I > do believe he respects. > > Now I think that if Snape KNEW what Harry just went through, his > behaviour was sadistic. Typical Snape style. Carol responds: Snape is taking just ten points because Harry was admittedly about to hex Malfoy. Surely this is just routine discipline? Notice that it's actually McGonagall who removes those ten rubies from the Gryffindor hourglass. *She* has no objections. Harry is fully recovered; it's been at least three days since the MoM, and Harry *is* misbehaving. I find it interesting that neither Snape nor Harry loses his temper during this incident. Both of them are keeping their emotions under control. No sarcastic remarks on Snape's part, no sadism that I can see. I think you were right in the first place to "give the man some credit." Again, if he hadn't contacted the Order and Dumbledore, Harry and his friends would not be alive. Carol From ryokas at hotmail.com Thu Nov 11 23:10:19 2004 From: ryokas at hotmail.com (kizor0) Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 23:10:19 -0000 Subject: A few random puzzles In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117648 > 3. In the Pensieve, Bertha Jorkins appears and delivers the >famous lines that have us all so baffled: "He put a hex on me, >Professor Dumbledore, and I was only teasing him, sir, I only said >I'd seen him kissing Florence behind the greenhouses last >Thursday . . . " "But why, Bertha," said Dumbledore sadly, >looking up at the now silently revolving girl, "why did you have >to follow him in the first place." > > For this Bertha Jorkins stuff to be important to make it into the > Pensieve and for Dumbledore to still be sad about it, >the "kissing" has to be more than garden-variety kissing. So I >wonder if Bertha saw Snape, who is half-dementor, administering >the Kiss to someone. Or maybe he is a vampire, and what Bertha >mistakes for a kiss is really a bite. Personally, I'm overcautious about running into new Mark Evanses. Do we have good reason to suspect that the boy and Florence are a Significant Plot Point, instead of just an example of Jorkins' character? The theory about a half-dementor Snape is a quite intriguing one, and certainly original, but... how many people do *you* know who would procreate with a dementor? - Kizor, who is somewhat sorry for giving you the mental image From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Thu Nov 11 23:14:36 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 23:14:36 -0000 Subject: Why has DD never suggested Snape thank Harry? (Was: Why has DD never suggest In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117649 > Carol responds: > Snape is taking just ten points because Harry was admittedly about to > hex Malfoy. Surely this is just routine discipline? Notice that it's > actually McGonagall who removes those ten rubies from the Gryffindor > hourglass. *She* has no objections. Harry is fully recovered; it's > been at least three days since the MoM, and Harry *is* misbehaving. Alla: I think that Harry will need more than THREE DAYS to "fully recover" from the lost of Sirius. Harry did not hex Malfoy yet and I think that Snape could have just let this one go, but when he ever does? I believe that Minerva has " no objection", because she never badmouths another teacher in front of the students (Trelawney is an exception, I think). Something Snape can hopefully learn from her one day. Notice, that even though she indeed raises no objection, she rectifies what Snape did the very next second. Carol: I think you were right in the first place to "give the man some > credit." Again, if he hadn't contacted the Order and Dumbledore, Harry > and his friends would not be alive. > Alla: I am not sure whether I was right or not. I have to think about it. From ryokas at hotmail.com Thu Nov 11 23:14:36 2004 From: ryokas at hotmail.com (kizor0) Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 23:14:36 -0000 Subject: Apparition lessons (was Re: Draco's POV?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117650 > What about the Room of Requirements? If someone needed to apparate > inside of Hogwart's, could this room meet that requirement? If so, > that opens up so much speculation (e.g., Snape's travels at the end > of Book 4, etc.). > > Any opinions? > Julie Mine is that your point is a very good one. It would depend on the amount of power the RoR holds. It can supply ordinary items and magical artefacts of some power in large amounts, that we've seen. So what if someone has a burning need to get to London; would he find a Portkey? If someone really needs to defeat Voldemort, would he find the Green-Flamed Torch or some such weapon inside? If the DEs take the place during the impending battle of Hogwarts, what happens? - Kizor From spotthedungbeetle at hotmail.com Thu Nov 11 23:48:52 2004 From: spotthedungbeetle at hotmail.com (dungrollin) Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 23:48:52 -0000 Subject: Life Debts was Why has DD never suggested Snape thank Harry In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117651 > Potioncat: > Can anyone locate the place where Snape and Harry talk about it? > Dungrollin: Back from bloody cold Switzerland with my books now... It's in PoA (probably my all-time favourite scene) in chapter 14, Snape's Grudge, after the mud-throwing incident in Hogsmeade. "I would hate you to run away with a false idea of your father, Potter," he [Snape] said, a terrible grin twisting his face. "Have you been imagining some act of glorious heroism? Then let me correct you - your saintly father and his friends played a hghly amusing joke on me that would have resulted in my death if your father hadn't got cold feet at the last moment. There was nothing brave about what he did. He was saving his own skin as much as mine. Had their joke succeeded, he would have been expelled from Hogwarts." Sorry, couldn't resist quoting a big chunk. No mention of any bond though, magical or otherwise. Dungrollin Worrying about C?te d'Ivoire again. From jiggsvelasco at yahoo.com Thu Nov 11 11:03:18 2004 From: jiggsvelasco at yahoo.com (jp velasco) Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 03:03:18 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: The Riddles' Murders (WAS: The only one he ever feared? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041111110318.25544.qmail@web52903.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 117652 Debbie wrote: > The only argument that supports the notion that the MoM must have known about it is that if the Improper Use of Magic Office employs countrywide surveillance, Mafalda Hopkirk's predecessor should have picked up on it. But I doubt they keep track of very much, or they would've noticed Mundungus Fletcher disapparating at 4 Privet Drive at the beginning of OOP.< JP replied: > Even if the magic done by wizards were "bad", it is not "improper" because using magic when your "of age" is allowed and I think that you'll need to get a licence to apparate, so logically, the Office of Improper Use of Magic had not known the Riddle murders because it was simply not their job to monitor them.< Kim now: > But then the deaths of three Riddles from Avada Kedavras would surely have been considered "harm to Muggles," as you say.... > In any case, AK (Avada Kedavra) is also an Unforgiveable Curse and it wouldn't matter if the wizard who performed it was "of age" -- performing AK, Crucio, or Imperius curses is supposed to land you in Azkaban. The MoM would have known about the 3 Muggles dying from AKs in Little Hangleton or else they were asleep on the job that day.< JP here: Good Point, but then I'm reminded of the Weasley Twins, (which are a year older than Harry in OotP) and they are allowed to use magic. I think the twins are 17 yrs old? so Tom Jr. would be "of age" when he had done the curse... Another thing that I remember is that Moody did the Imperius Curse on his students, and nobody from the MoM arrested him during that time... and also Tom Jr. was alone with his family, I think there's a canon where it stated that there were no witnesses to the murder. and even if the MoM monitors these Curses, they would focus their attention on other known wizards and witches that have their interest (I got this idea because when you think about it, the MoM are keeping tabs on what was happening on Privet Drive and the surrounding areas) and during his time, Tom Jr. was not that notorious. on the other hand... Umbridge did try to use the Crucio curse on Harry... stating that the MoM will understand because of the situation, but if the MoM indeed has the means to monitor all magical activities around England, then they would have known that Voldy was back because he had used Two of the Unforgivable Curses on Harry the night he returned. Thanks for responding! From mommystery at hotmail.com Fri Nov 12 00:42:44 2004 From: mommystery at hotmail.com (mommystery2003) Date: Fri, 12 Nov 2004 00:42:44 -0000 Subject: Why has DD never suggested Snape thank Harry? (Was: Why has DD never suggested H In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117653 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "eggplant9998" wrote: > > "mommystery2003" wrote: > > > does Harry, when everything is over and > > knowing that Snape was not the total evil > > "git" he had been made out to be, thank > > him for looking out for him? No, > > So when do you think it would be a good time to thank Snape? Perhaps after everything was over in the first book. He heard from Quirell that Snape was doing the counter curse. He knew right then that it wasn't Snape that was trying to kill him. Ces From jiggsvelasco at yahoo.com Thu Nov 11 11:24:09 2004 From: jiggsvelasco at yahoo.com (jp velasco) Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 03:24:09 -0800 (PST) Subject: The Riddles' Murders (WAS: The only one he ever feared? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041111112409.35894.qmail@web52909.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 117654 Kim: > And I'll toss out this last question: who do you think taught young Tom Riddle how to perform an Avada Kedavra? < JP here I think that Tom had "theoretically" known how to use the AK Curse, you know, Knowing the incatation and everything... Let's also remember that Tom Jr. is a gifted Hogwarts Student and he probably did the curses first on animals. and i don't think that the Unforgivable Curses is that hard to do. In OotP, Harry had used the Crucio Curse on Bella and it worked... for a little while... and remember what bella said? I dont have my book with me but I think that she said that anger doesn't make the curse effective... the user must mean it... savor the pleasure on hurting or killing someone in order to use it properly. And I think that Tom Jr did: he meant to kill his family, and following logically the attitude of the present day Voldy, had the pleasure of doing so. Cheers! From mommystery at hotmail.com Fri Nov 12 00:43:10 2004 From: mommystery at hotmail.com (mommystery2003) Date: Fri, 12 Nov 2004 00:43:10 -0000 Subject: Why has DD never suggested Snape thank Harry? (Was: Why has DD never suggested H In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117655 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "eggplant9998" wrote: > > "mommystery2003" wrote: > > > does Harry, when everything is over and > > knowing that Snape was not the total evil > > "git" he had been made out to be, thank > > him for looking out for him? No, > > So when do you think it would be a good time to thank Snape? Perhaps after everything was over in the first book. He heard from Quirell that Snape was doing the counter curse. He knew right then that it wasn't Snape that was trying to kill him. Ces From mimbeltonia at yahoo.com Thu Nov 11 12:45:03 2004 From: mimbeltonia at yahoo.com (mimbeltonia) Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 12:45:03 -0000 Subject: Brain room - Data backup In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117656 > kjirstem: > snip > As for who they are or used to be, maybe they're puppetmasters > controlling the Wizarding World....or maybe they are just the WW > equivalent of data backup. Mimbeltonia: Of course, kjirstem! What would a wizard equivalent of a computer cluster be: A tank of brains with tenatacle thought strands mingling! These could be created by magic (transfiguration), and would not necessarily have to be removed from a once living wizard. Cedric Diggory was transfiguring a rock into a living dog etc. etc. Why not a train of thoughts or a pile of documents - or a crammed waste basket, even - into a brain? Mimbeltonia From bboyminn at yahoo.com Fri Nov 12 00:57:23 2004 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Fri, 12 Nov 2004 00:57:23 -0000 Subject: Apparition lessons (was Re: Draco's POV?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117657 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "kizor0" wrote: > > > What about the Room of Requirements? If someone needed to apparate > > inside of Hogwart's, could this room meet that requirement? If so, > > that opens up so much speculation (e.g., Snape's travels at the end > > of Book 4, etc.). > > > > Any opinions? > > Julie > Mine is that your point is a very good one. It would depend on the > amount of power the RoR holds. It can supply ordinary items and > magical artefacts of some power in large amounts, that we've seen. So > what if someone has a burning need to get to London; would he find a > Portkey? If someone really needs to defeat Voldemort, would he find > the Green-Flamed Torch or some such weapon inside? If the DEs take > the place during the impending battle of Hogwarts, what happens? > - Kizor bboyminn: I have to wonder if there aren't limits to what the Room of Requirements can do. First, in the sense of desiring it from a distance, as in desiring to apparate into it from outside Hogwarts. Personally, I don't think that can happen. I think it grants the need of the immediate user; immediate user not only in the sense of immediate in-the-moment need, but needing to be in the immediate proximity. Remember, according to Dobby, you have to go to the hallway outside the Room of Requirements and walk past it three times concentrating on what it is you desire. That the only model for access we have seen. So, if you are in London, or Devon, or Edinburgh, there is no known way to active the room from your remote location. Also, remote access creates potential conflict, what if one person is outside the door of the RoR with one desire, and another person is at a remote location with a conflicting desire? Next, we have never seen the Room provide anything /active/ like a portkey. It provided space, books, bookshelves, pillows/cushions, and various magical instruments (Foe Detectors/secrecy sensors). I suspect the magical instruments are only valid and active within the confines of the Room. That is on the assumption that the magical devices were created by the Room itself. Harry says that he suspects that the Foe Glass was the Glass that once belonged to Mad Eye Moody. If that is true then the Room summoned it from somewhere in the castle; it didn't create it. That instrument would work inside or outside the Room, because it wasn't created by the Room. For the Room to create a Portkey, that's another matter, because a Portkey needs to be programmed. You first need the object, then you need to imbue that object with not only the /action/ charm which would be somewhat universal, but also with the activation method and destination charms which are very specific. In addition, once the object left the Room, it would be out of the influence of the Room. I suspect, although I admit I can't prove, that once out of the influence of the Room, the Portkey object, which is probably conjured, and the Portkey Charm would faulter. So, getting into The Room from outside Hogwarts would be difficult, and relying on any object created by The Room, outside The Room, would not be reliable or advisable. One last thought, if the Room gives you what you require and Umbridge required evidence to convict the DA Club members, then couldn't Dumbledore have reasonably argued that the Room created the Member List because that's what Umbridge /required/. That would make the Member List very unreliable evidenece as far as I can see. Just a few thoughts. Steve/bbboyminn (was bboy_mn) From Vivamus at TaprootTech.com Thu Nov 11 17:25:19 2004 From: Vivamus at TaprootTech.com (Vivamus) Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 12:25:19 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Quirrell In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041111122581.SM01396@DEVBOX> No: HPFGUIDX 117658 > > khinterberg: > > Why, when Death Eaters won't even say his name, can a young > professor with Vapormort on the back of his head say it without > any sign of fear whatsoever? There is no "Dark Lord" business, > no trace of a cringe or sign on pain...what, frankly, is the deal? > Pippin: > It's a funny thing about secret names -- there's not much point > unless *somebody* is allowed to say or hear them. > > "It was a name I was already using at Hogwarts, to my most > intimate friends only, of course. [...] a name I knew wizards > everywhere would one day fear to speak." --CoS ch 17 > > We know, then, that Voldemort has always allowed his closest > supporters to hear his name. Might he not also allow them to > speak it? > > > Fake!Moody uses the name. Lucius Malfoy does not flinch when > Dumbledore speaks it at the end of CoS. Several, but not *all* of > the Death Eaters in the MoM hiss when Harry speaks it. Bella > says, "You dare speak his name with your unworthy lips, you > dare besmirch it with your half-blood's tongue, you dare--" (OOP > ch 35) which sounds to me as if certain worthy, pure-blooded > individuals are allowed to use it. She does not flinch when she > hears it from Harry's lips again in chapter 36. > > As usual, it's possible to draw contradictory conclusions from all > this, in no particular order. > > 1) It's a Flint. JKR is sloppy and doesn't always show the Death > Eaters flinching from the name or fearing to use it. > > 2) It's a Clue. Voldemort's most loyal followers are allowed to > use the name, as a mark of favor, or to mislead the enemy. In > that case, no one can be elimated from consideration as a > hidden Death Eater by their willingness to use the name. > > Pippin Vivamus: I think it must be a Flint, although I don't think it's fair to accuse JKR of sloppiness. In SS/PS, it is quite clear when Quirrell is speaking, and when LV is speaking, and it is Quirrell who uses the name. I suspect that must be because the whole sub-plot of who can and cannot speak the name just hadn't arisen by that point in the series. By the end of CoS, I think the question of what the DEs would say must have come up in JKR's mind, but Malfoy's lack of reaction to DD may have more to do with his self-restraint in DD's presence than anything else. Later DEs might or might not flinch, hiss, or whatever, just as you might jump the first time you heard someone curse, but not likely the second time. For me, the only puzzler is Quirrell, but I think we can chalk that up to an undeveloped sub-plot. I don't there is any other example in the books of a (known) DE speaking LV's name. DD, McGonagall, Hagrid, Sirius, Rhemus, DD, Harry, Hermione -- anyone else? -- are all enemies of LV. Let's see, who else speaks the name Voldemort? Tom Riddle, of course, but he IS LV, after a fashion. Aha! (PoA): "Innocent, but scared!" squealed Pettigrew. "If Voldemort's supporters were after me, it was because I put one of their best men in Azkaban -- the spy, Sirius Black!" So Pettigrew also spoke the name. Barty Crouch, Sr., spoke the name at Bagman's trial (GoF): "Ludovic Bagman, you were caught passing information to Lord Voldemort's supporters," said Mr. Crouch. Barty Crouch, Jr., says the name at the end of GoF: Moody's office came into sharper focus, and so did Moody himself. ... He looked as white as Fudge had looked, and both eyes were fixed unblinkingly upon Harry's face. "Voldemort's back, Harry? You're sure he's back? How did he do it?" And that's it, through the first four books, anyway. It would be a good question to ask JKR some time. It could simply be that the whole aspect of DEs being more afraid of speaking the name than others didn't gel until the fifth book. Vivamus From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Fri Nov 12 01:06:40 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Fri, 12 Nov 2004 01:06:40 -0000 Subject: Quirrell In-Reply-To: <20041111090214.7262.qmail@web52602.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117660 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Feng Zengkun wrote: > > khinterberg: > > >It has always bothered me that in the last chapter of PS/SS Quirrell > >says Voldemort's name. > > > >"Tried to frighten me--as though he could, when I had Lord Voldemort > >on my side..." p290 U.S. pb > > > >And then again on the next page: > > > >"A foolish young man I was then, full of ridiculous ideas about good > >and evil. Lord Voldemort showed me how wrong I was." > > > >Why, when Death Eaters won't even say his name, can a young professor > >with Vapormort on the back of his head say it without any sign of fear > >whatsoever? There is no "Dark Lord" business, no trace of a cringe or > >sign on pain...what, frankly, is the deal? > > > zk: > > It struck me that it's Voldemort speaking through Quirrell, and not > actually Quirrell speaking. The tone of what Quirrell says is exactly the > tone Voldemort uses when the latter speaks, and (although I could be wrong) doesn't Voldemort refer to himself in the third person in other instances? I don't have the book with me at the moment, but I think Voldemort says (paraphrasing) 'Lord Voldemort is kind/generous, he will forgive' or something like that. I think it was the graveyard scene in GoF? Damn it. Can someone supply the quote (if there is one)? Carol responds: But note that Quirrell refers to himself here as "I" and to Lord Voldemort in the third person, which is the normal pattern. I think Quirrell remains a distinct entity (he can still be ordered around and punished by Voldemort) even though his personality here is more assertive and Dark Lordish than it is earlier, when Harry hears him whimpering and thinks he's talking to Snape. (No pretense of timidity in that situation; he's plainly terrified.) Here, however, he has drunk unicorn blood and is altogether converted to Voldemort's side, his loyal servant (cf. Barty Jr.). Saying Voldemort's name aloud (twice) may be part of that bravado posture. Also I think that his attitude toward Snape, whom he calls Severus, is his own, not Voldemort's: "Yes, he is, rather the type, swooping around like an overgrown bat" (quoting from memory here). Quirrell seems proud of himself for throwing Harry and perhaps others off the track, as if he deserved the credit for making Harry suspect Snape. At any rate, this is probably not Voldemort's attitude--he may well be beginning to suspect Snape's loyalty, and with good cause. As for the reluctance of the Death Eaters to speak Voldemort's name, iusing "the Dark Lord" may be a sign of respect for their "master" (Bellatrix thinks Harry is unworthy to speak his name), but note that Barty Jr. speaks the name at least once under the influence of Veritaserum. I don't think it's fear that prevents them from using it, except maybe in the case of Karkaroff. We don't see anyone but Snape grabbing their arms convulsively when the name is spoken or the Dark Mark is referred to. Note that the DEs in the graveyard have no such reaction when Voldemort speaks his own name. My theory is that it's *only* Snape whose Dark Mark burns when he hears the name (or a reference to Death Eaters who walked free) because *only* Snape is an *ex* DE disloyal to Voldemort and loyal to Voldemort's enemy Dumbledore. I think that the Dark Mark, being sentient, is aware of this disloyalty and punishes him for it. It's another clue, like the fact that Snape shows up in the Foe Glass with Dumbledore and McGonagall, that Snape really is now "no more a Death Eater than [Dumbledore]." If Quirrell were still the DADA instructor, turban and all, and were pretending to assist Dumbledore against Crouch!Moody, he would not have shown up in the Foe Glass. Carol From nrenka at yahoo.com Fri Nov 12 01:11:23 2004 From: nrenka at yahoo.com (nrenka) Date: Fri, 12 Nov 2004 01:11:23 -0000 Subject: Who says Voldemort's name--pointer to post 109098 for analysis In-Reply-To: <20041111122581.SM01396@DEVBOX> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117661 I don't have much to say here, but to point everyone BACK to post 109098, by our much beloved Neri, which is an analysis of the uses of Voldemort's name in canon by characters, and a discussion of the possible FLINT-iness involved. Utterly complete, canon citations and all. Please please please read this!!!! -Nora goes to iron her hands, now From jlnbtr at yahoo.com Thu Nov 11 16:07:28 2004 From: jlnbtr at yahoo.com (Juli) Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 08:07:28 -0800 (PST) Subject: McGonagall giving points (Was Re: Who took more points from Gryffindors) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041111160728.80191.qmail@web53102.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 117662 Sue: > ....do you recall McGonagall ever giving any points? I don't. MM actually gave Harry, Rob, Hernione, Neville, and Luna each 50 points at the end of OoP right after they returned from MoM, 50 points for letting the world know that LV was back. Juli From willsonkmom at msn.com Fri Nov 12 01:51:29 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Fri, 12 Nov 2004 01:51:29 -0000 Subject: McGonagall giving points (Was Re: Who took more points from Gryffindors) In-Reply-To: <20041111160728.80191.qmail@web53102.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117663 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Juli wrote: > > Sue: > > ....do you recall McGonagall ever giving any points? I don't. Juli: > MM actually gave Harry, Rob, Hernione, Neville, and > Luna each 50 points at the end of OoP right after they > returned from MoM, 50 points for letting the world > know that LV was back. > Potioncat: Didn't she give points to Harry and Ron for fighting the troll in SS? Or is that movie contamination? (Still cannot find SS in our house!) From jlnbtr at yahoo.com Thu Nov 11 16:23:58 2004 From: jlnbtr at yahoo.com (Juli) Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 08:23:58 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Apparition lessons (was Re: Draco's POV?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041111162358.65434.qmail@web53105.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 117664 Juli wrote: > > Ooops, I forgot Hermione mentioned it about a thousand times in each and every book, plus Snape mentioned it in PoA, and Umbridge on OoP... If you know where to find the book, I'd like to be the second person to read it ;) Maybe they go to Hogsmeade for the Apparition lessons. Potioncat: > Hmm, why do you supose JKR has told us so many times that no one can Apparate inside the Hogwarts grounds? Are we getting too comfortable with that information? What do you think would happen if someone forgot, and tried to Apparate? Some poor sleep deprived 7th year late for Potions class? I'd be urprised if no one had ever tried it. I mean, knowing how many students have a isregard for rules... < I think if you tried to apparate/dispparate within the castle gounds nothing would happen. Just like if right now I tried to fly, it's not going to happen. If DD could't dispparate in OoP when Fudge was about to arrest him, so I doubt anyother student could, no matter how hard they tried. On an other post (sorry, I forgot who signed it) in this same thread, a teacher just can't charm a room to make apparition possible. Hogwarts is protected by very ancient magic, so how could you just erase a thousand year old magic? An other post says the students aren't allowed to do magic outside Hogwarts, I don't think it applies to Hogsmeade, Hermione did magic in PoA (she moved a tree "mobilarbus" when Harry went without permission), and I doubt Hermione would ever do magic if it wasn't allowed, So they can't do magic outside Hogwarts, Hogsmeade and the train, still they could learn how to apparate at Hogsmeade. Juli From foxmoth at qnet.com Fri Nov 12 02:19:05 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Fri, 12 Nov 2004 02:19:05 -0000 Subject: =?iso-8859-1?q?Re:_JKR=92s_giant_mistake=3F_(who_says_the_name)?= In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117665 Neri , some time ago: > Now, I always had the strong suspicion that Crouch!Moody using the V- word here is simply an editing mistake. > No, they don't. All three of them use "Voldemort's". > > Pettigrew: "If Voldemort's supporters were after me" > > Crouch Sr: "you were caught passing information to Lord Voldemort's supporters". > > Crouch Jr: ""Voldemort's back, Harry?" > > Now, I'm sure you can build a very interesting theory on this amazing coincidence, but I have a horrible suspicion that the explanation is rather mundane: JKR or one of her editors run a computerized search over all occurrences of the word "Voldemort" in the manuscripts, when editing them, to make sure this word is not spoken by any character who shouldn't speak it. Unfortunately they have the option "find whole words only" checked, and so they miss the "Voldemort's" cases. > Pippin: Um, I just did a simple check with the most commonly used word-processing program, and "find whole words only" locates "Voldemort's" just fine. Pippin From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Fri Nov 12 03:43:18 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Fri, 12 Nov 2004 03:43:18 -0000 Subject: Hagrid's attack on Dudley (Was: A few random puzzles) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117666 In Oct 2001 Cindy wrote > > Here are a few things that came to mind: > > > > 1. In PS/SS, Vernon insults Dumbledore, and Hagrid tries to turn > > Dudley into a pig, giving him a pig tail that has to be surgically > > removed. But why? If Vernon is the problem, why hex an innocent > > boy? > > Potioncat: > In the medium which not be named, Dudley is stealing Harry's cake, > but in canon, he's not doing anything. Did Hagrid just hex him > because he exists? Are we seeing a long standing trend of bullying > by Gryffindors? No, really, what is going on here? Carol responds: Two things strike me here. Hagrid seems to regard Muggles in general, regardless of age or sex, in much the same stereotypical way that wizards regard giants--they're all either worthless or downright bad. Now I actually can understand the prejudice against giants, who are essentially big, brutal, lumps of stone who enjoy killing each other. Grawp may be a partial exception, but nevertheless, he is clearly an exception. Giants *can't* mingle with people, wizards or otherwise, so they have to be kept isolated. Let them kill each other off, fine; but keep them away from defenseless Muggles. (Just how a giantess could marry a wizard and produce a child is, well, ahem, a topic for old posts.) But lumping all Muggles together puts the Grangers in the same category as the Dursleys. Not all Muggles are stupid; not all Muggles mistreat children--even in the Potterverse. Okay, I'm somewhat biased in favor of Muggles, being one myself, but Hagrid, IMO, is prejudiced against them. He's lumping all the Dursleys together as worthless Muggles who mistreat Harry. He happens to be right, but I think he's basing his conclusions on insufficient evidence. In any case, he sees nothing wrong with punishing Dudley for what Vernon has done because all Muggles, and especially all Dursleys, are the same in his view. And another thing: he seems to be viewing Dudley as Vernon's most precious possession (next to Petunia). How do you really hurt somebody? Hurt the person they love. (It reminds me of the Abraham and Isaac story where God supposedly tested Abraham's loyalty by commanding him to sacrifice his most prized possession, his only legitimate son. No one cared how Isaac felt about the matter! But I digress.) Hagrid doesn't intend to give Dudley a pig's tail. He intends to strip him of his (semblance of?) humanity altogether and turn him into a pig. His only regret is that he doesn't succeed because Dudley was "so much like a pig already." (Actually, of course, the fact that the wand inside the umbrella is broken and the wizard who's pointing it is less than half-trained *might* have something to do with it.) Even Crouch!Moody, when he turned Draco into a bouncing ferret, was at least punishing the person who committed the offense. But Dudley is just a son of a Muggle, and a Dursley to boot, and he must have bullied Harry at some point, so it's okay to turn him into a pig (inspired, no doubt, by the Chocolate Frog Cards featuring Circe). Please note that I am not defending Dudley, who is a spoiled brat and a bully who no doubt deseerves some sort of punishment. It's this punishment and these circumstances and the assumptions that I think Hagrid is making to justify his action that bothers me. (And, yes, I know that at this point he's a "giant" in a book with a fairytale atmosphere that we don't see later. But I still think that if Hagrid was going to turn anyone into an animal, it should have been Vernon, rather than visiting the sins of the father upon the son. Anyone want to come to Hagrid's defense or at least correct the flaws you perceive in my analysis? Carol, who is not sure why the biblical examples and quotations suddenly flew into her head, though Circe was put there by Kneasy's post From flamingstarchows at att.net Fri Nov 12 04:02:11 2004 From: flamingstarchows at att.net (texaschow) Date: Fri, 12 Nov 2004 04:02:11 -0000 Subject: McGonagall giving points (Was Re: Who took more points from Gryffindors) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117667 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "potioncat" wrote: > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Juli wrote: > > > > Sue: > > > ....do you recall McGonagall ever giving any points? I don't. > > > Juli: > > MM actually gave Harry, Rob, Hernione, Neville, and > > Luna each 50 points at the end of OoP right after they > > returned from MoM, 50 points for letting the world > > know that LV was back. > > > > Potioncat: > Didn't she give points to Harry and Ron for fighting the troll in > SS? Or is that movie contamination? (Still cannot find SS in our > house!) ~Cathy~ She gave 5 points each to Harry and Ron for saving Hermione after she had deducted 5 points from Hermione for going after the troll. Earlier, before the "midnight duel," Hermione mentioned that Ron and Harry being in the hall after hours was going to get them in trouble and lose the points she had earned in transfiguration for knowing about switching spells. All in all, I'd say that MM does give out points, maybe just not as often as some others, or maybe e just don't always hear about it. From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Fri Nov 12 04:06:55 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Fri, 12 Nov 2004 04:06:55 -0000 Subject: Hagrid's attack on Dudley (Was: A few random puzzles) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117668 > Carol responds: old > Okay, I'm somewhat biased > in favor of Muggles, being one myself, but Hagrid, IMO, is prejudiced > against them. He's lumping all the Dursleys together as worthless > Muggles who mistreat Harry. He happens to be right, but I think he's > basing his conclusions on insufficient evidence. In any case, he sees > nothing wrong with punishing Dudley for what Vernon has done because > all Muggles, and especially all Dursleys, are the same in his view. > snip. > > Anyone want to come to Hagrid's defense or at least correct the flaws > you perceive in my analysis? Alla: OK, first and foremost let me say that I have NO defense for Hagrid in this particular occassion, NONE. Dudley indeed did nothing to harry in front of Hagrid. I would say he bullied him plenty when Hagrid was not there, but you mentioned it yourself. Nevertheless, I see a mitigating circumstance for Hagrid - he WAS provoked by Vernon and he DID lose his temper. I would argue that if hagrid would hex Vernon, he would be very much justified. "Now, you listen here, boy," he snarled, "I accept there's something starnge about you, probably nothing a good beating wouldn't have cured - and as for all this about your parents, well, they were wierdos, no denying it, and the world's better off without them in my opinion...." - PS/SS, p.36, paperback. So, Vernon insults Lily and James and Harry in one sentence. Hagrdi obviously knew them and loved them. What does Hagrid do? "But at that moment, Hagrid leapt from the sofa and drew a battered pink umbrella from inside his coat. Pointing this at Uncle Vernon like a sword, he said, "I'm warning you, Dursley - I'm warning you - one more word..." - id, p.36. Hagrid manages to control himself here, but quite soon he loses it. Was he right? Nope. Is he a bully? Sorry, not IMO. Decent man, who lost it while lsitening to the insults about his dead friends and their son. Now, what did you mean about punishing son for the sins of his father? We are not talking about Snape, right? :o) Dudley did enough to Harry to deserve his own punishment. "Harry hunting", anyone? I am also not getting your point about Hagrid being prejudiced about all muggles. He is prejudiced about Dursleys,sure( very deservingly so, IMO). He calls them muggles, because that is who they are. Could you give me a quote,where Hagrld calls all muggles worthless, please? He may be guilty AT MOST, what is all WW is guilty off inregards to muggles, even Arthur Weasley - patronising attitude, because muggles do not have magic, but that is about it. Oooo, I know. I just came up with even better defense for Hagrid. maybe he knows Legilimency and he used it on Dursley. :o) (No, I don't really believe it). Another idea - if Harry indeed was watched closely than he would ever know when he was with Dursleys, maybe Hagrid was one of those who watched hima nd then he saw every cruel trick Dudley played on hima nd that is why Hagrid PLANNED to turn Dudley into a pig, because he ahd plenty of time to plan him. This one I may believe in actually From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Fri Nov 12 04:07:47 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Fri, 12 Nov 2004 04:07:47 -0000 Subject: Kreacher's bandages In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117669 Carol earlier: > > "Has anyone noticed that Kreacher's hands are bandaged as if he has just ironed them when Harry tries to contact Sirius Black using Umbridge's fireplace (OoP Am. ed. 740)? Has he ironed them in advance because he's in the process of betraying his master or because he has just injured Buckbeak or . . . ? kmc responded: > Yes, his hands are bandaged and I think it's because he has just > committed an act of betrayal by taking an order from a DE and > injuring Buckbeak. > > BTW I started wondering about this entire series of events the last > time I read the book. How does Kreacher know when to injure BB? > There must have been some system in place to let him know. > > Obviously, Voldemort knows when Harry has had the dream. He can > alert the DEs and someone can let Kreacher know it's time to hurt > BB. How do they let Kreacher know though? Does he pop out of the > house every hour or two? Seems unlikely. There must be a more > efficient system. Do you think they gave him a dark mark? > > Also, do you think Kreacher knew about the two way mirror and perhaps took it so Harry couldn't contact Sirius that way? Perhaps the DEs 're-wired' it so they could use it with Kreacher. > > If Kreacher took it early enough, that may explain why Sirius didn't > ask Harry why he didn't use the mirror when he wanted to talk about > James. Perhaps the mirror had disappeared and Sirius thought he'd > misplaced it or that Kreacher destroyed it. If he knew it was gone, > he may think Harry'd already tried that method and resorted to the > floo network when the mirror didn't work. > > JKR did say the mirror wouldn't have been as useful as we'd have > thought. Maybe that's why. Maybe not. Thoughts? Carol responds: I don't think he's using a mirror. I think there are only two, Sirius's and James's, which Harry now has, and that Sirius has his (but is keeping the fact that he gave James's to Harry a scret from Lupin--sorry--wrong thread.) I also doubt very much that Kreacher has a Dark Mark. He's a House Elf, a slave, a lesser being in the eyes of Voldemort. I a Muggleborn can become a DE only in rare circumstances, as JKR said on her site (paving the way, perhaps, for a certain toadlike woman to join the forces of evil), certainly a nonhuman couldn't. Even the elder Blacks, whom Kreacher worships, weren't DEs, so it's unlikely that their servant would become one, even if he could. He's communicating somehow with Narcissa (and directly or indirectly with Lucius), but how he's doing it (after the escape and return at Christmastime) is completely unclear. So, as you say, how did he know when to injure Kreacher? And how did Voldemort know that the vision he was planting in Harry's brain would succeed that time? Was it because he knew that Harry had finally gotten through the door--not in his dream but in the occlumency session where he allowed the memory to continue despite Snape's attempts to stop him? Help. It isn't just Snape's part of the story that has holes in it. There are more holes in the OoP plot than in Mrs. Black's genealogical tapestry. How did anybody know when to do anything? (Okay, that last question is rhetorical.) Carol, who's leaving for California at 8 in the morning From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Fri Nov 12 05:06:25 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Fri, 12 Nov 2004 05:06:25 -0000 Subject: Muggle World (Was: Quills) In-Reply-To: <001901c4c820$6c6232a0$704b6d51@f3b7j4> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117670 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "manawydan" wrote: > >>Carol wrote > >>I still think the closest equivalent is the academic gowns worn by > >>students at Oxford--not the modern version but the one that was worn > >>from the thirteenth through the nineteenth centuries to distinguish > >>the students (and faculty)from the ordinary townspeople--Town and > >>Gown. > > >Potioncat: > >Where would the rest of us find a picture or description of that? > > Here's a catalogue with some of them in > > http://www.shepherdandwoodward.co.uk/acatalog/sitemap.html > > and a description of all of them > > http://www.all-science-fair-projects.com/science_fair_projects_encyclopedia/Academic_dress_of_Oxford_University > > (takes me back a good few years!) > > I also had a mental picture of something like Oxbridge gowns when I read about Hogwarts robes, though (from having worn a commoner's gown) it wouldn't keep you very warm (or modest) without something underneath. Possibly they are somewhat more "monkish" and all-enveloping. > > Also interesting to speculate whether the idea of having different > ceremonial gowns also applies in the WW: whether Madam Malkin has a > catalogue of patterns for the purpose... > Carol responds: I specifically didn't provide that first link because it shows the modern, open-front, sometimes short gowns. The older gowns (12th to 19th century) could have been worn with nothing under them--rather like a priest's cassock. But I haven't been able to find what I'm looking for on the Internet yet, though I've done several Google searches. I agree that the Hogwarts robes, like the earlier academic gowns, have to be "monkish and all-enveloping," as the purebloods apparently wear either underwear or nothing at all underneath them. Underwear as we know it is a relatively modern invention. A woman might wear a garter belt and stockings or a man a codpiece (neither very necessary under a closed robe, but "linens" and "drawers" (or whatever) are 18th-century innovations and probably came late to the WW. (Corsets are of course much older, but it's not likely they'd be worn under Hogwarts robes in any case.) Madam Malkin does state that she has robes for all occasions. Possibly she sells patterns as well, though we don't see Molly sewing her children's robes, so maybe Madam M. doesn't want the competition. At any rate, what the students wear to the Yule Ball seems to be completely different from their usual uniforms, and what Dumbledore wears differs radically from Snape's black robes and cloak. Even he wears dress robes to the feasts, which may or may not be black, and a green robe to at least one Quidditch final. But one and all, I'll bet, are floor-length and closed all around. I still can't find the kind of academic gown I'm looking for, but I did find this page with various links related to the history of underwear: http://directory.google.com/Top/Recreation/Living_History/By_Topic/Costumes/Undergarments/ Well, there's this, which sort of gives the idea, but without the hood and the fancy trim. Maybe this is the DE's idea of a dress robe: http://www.zoogstercostumes.com/r16551.html Carol, still unable to find what she's looking for and with no time to find it From jlnbtr at yahoo.com Thu Nov 11 22:21:17 2004 From: jlnbtr at yahoo.com (jlnbtr) Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 22:21:17 -0000 Subject: Hogwarts robes (Re: Muggle World (Was: Quills)) In-Reply-To: <001901c4c820$6c6232a0$704b6d51@f3b7j4> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117671 > Ffred wrote: > http://www.all-science-fair-projects.com/science_fair_projects_encyclopedia/Academic_dress_of_Oxford_University > > I also had a mental picture of something like Oxbridge gowns when I > read about Hogwarts robes, though (from having worn a commoner's gown) > it wouldn't keep you very warm (or modest) without something > underneath. > Possibly they are somewhat more "monkish" and all-enveloping. Juli: I just visited the site, and yep, that's how I imagine Hogwarts' robes like, although I think they're longer, like ankle length, and on top a cape to protect against the cold weather. Juli From clearlychaotic at yahoo.com Fri Nov 12 01:31:51 2004 From: clearlychaotic at yahoo.com (Dijana) Date: Fri, 12 Nov 2004 01:31:51 -0000 Subject: DD's affection for Harry (was Re: DD's respect for Snape) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117672 > Alla: > I disagree that Dumbledore does not have affection towards Harry. > If we were to think that he was telling the truth at the end of OOP, > his love for the boy caused him to do all those things to him. You > know, hide truth from Harry for as long as possible, etc. I wasn't suggesting that Dumbledore doesn't have any affection for Harry (that much was obvious in the ending of OOP.) I was only suggesting that Dumbledore was very good at hiding that said affection. ~Ana From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Fri Nov 12 05:32:33 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Fri, 12 Nov 2004 05:32:33 -0000 Subject: Muggle World - Wizard Robes In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117673 Steve (bboyminn) wrote: > > We discussed wizard robes and period costumes in the past, but it's > been a long time, so here is a suggestion - search Google for > 'medieval wizard robes' and you will come across an amazing number of > links (10,000 actually). Like links to- > > Simplicity Sewing Patters - sew your own. > http://www.simplicity.com/index.cfm?cat=4&type=19&sec=0&id=59&startrow=1 > > Simplicity example - Adult Wizard Robes > http://www.simplicity.com/design.cfm?designId=10706&design=9753 > > Simplicity example - Adult Medieval Robe > http://www.simplicity.com/design.cfm?designId=10419&design=5925 > > Medieval Weapons Arts - Monk's Robe > http://www.mwart.com/xq/ASP/pid.1127/cat.139/qx/product.htm > > Order Of Merlin - Harry Potter Costumes > http://www.orderofmerlin.com/generic3.html > > I think the Adult robes in the books are very closee to the classic > fairytale wizard robes and close to the adult wizard robes in the movie. > > However, I think it's reasonable for the kid's school wizard robes to > have been modified and somewhat modernized over time. So, while they > do resemble classic wizard robes, they are really just an > over/outer-robe similar to but not quite as modern as those seen in > the movie. > > I suspect that clothing worn in the implied era was made of many > layers because it was very difficult to heat castles and other > medieval buildings. Consequently, it would have been reasonable for > the outer wizard's robe that we see to conceal a lighter underrobe, > which concealed some type of underclothing or tights. > > I guess my point is that modern wizard kids and the official school > robes would have been more of an outer covering for the sake of > tradition and the underclothing would have been somewhat normal by > modern standards. > > Difficult to say with any real degree of accuracy. This being fiction, > and fiction being moldable to the author's will and the reader's > fancy, I can certainly see JKR intending the robes to be a very > simplified versions of the fancy robes wizards are seen to wear in > fantasy books and artwork with those magical themes. Since wizards are > fiction, wizard robes are mostly based on fantasy with just a trace of > reality thrown in. > > Other good themes to persue in Google searches would be things like > 'costumes wizard robes' or 'Medieval wizard costumes' or 'fantasy > costumes', etc.... > > http://www.authenticwardrobe.com/Wizards_Witches/wizards_witches.html > > http://www.silvermane.com/MR/MR-8312.html > > Garb World - Monks Robes > http://www.garbtheworld.com/pgs/robes.shtml > > I think a somewhat more simplified version of these monks robes would > be close to what JKR intended the Howarts robes to look like. > > Just a few fun link for those who are interested. > > Steve/bboyminn (was bboy_mn) Carol responds: Great links, Steve. (BTW, we really do know who you are by now. :-) ) I think I'll give up my own search. Just one teeny point: I don't think the student's robes have been modernized. They certainly aren't open with Muggle clothes underneath, as in the illustrations and films. Note that a pointed black (standard Halloween witch style) is part of the uniform for both boys and girls, though we do see the hats mostly in SS/PS. But I think JKR wanted her young readers to see the Hogwarts students much as they'd always envisioned witches, only young and of both sexes and not evil. Same with broomsticks and cauldrons and toads and cats, and even the beetle's eyes in the Apothecary--standard witch folklore imposed on a British boarding school backdrop, with Dumbledore as a cross between Merlin and Santa Claus (Father Christmas), at least in SS/PS. But my original idea of the medieval academic costume of Oxford as a model for the Hogwarts uniform for students and the more socially conservative teachers (Snape). It amounts to the mental picture (minus the pointy hats) and fits with the idea of Hogwarts as an ancient school in which medieval traditions survive. Carol, reminding herself that getting up early to catch a plane isn't *quite* as bad as facing a dragon in the TWT. Really it's not. Really. From witchypooh67 at yahoo.com Fri Nov 12 01:58:38 2004 From: witchypooh67 at yahoo.com (witchypooh67) Date: Fri, 12 Nov 2004 01:58:38 -0000 Subject: Magical ability detected at birth (was Re: Evans family) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117674 > Roxx: > > In an interview, JK has said that there is a book that writes > > down the name of a magical baby when they are born and when > > they turn 11, they get a Hogwarts letter. Kelly: What I don't understand is how the book *knows* that a baby is magical. It might assume a baby born to magical parents is also magical, but does it *know* a muggle born (like Hermione or the Creevys) is magical at birth, or does it wait for evidence when the child makes strange things happen? From stonehenge.orders at verizon.net Fri Nov 12 02:05:43 2004 From: stonehenge.orders at verizon.net (kjirstem) Date: Fri, 12 Nov 2004 02:05:43 -0000 Subject: Brain room - Data backup In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117675 > Mimbeltonia: > > Of course, kjirstem! What would a wizard equivalent of a computer > cluster be: A tank of brains with tenatacle thought strands mingling! > These could be created by magic (transfiguration), and would not > necessarily have to be removed from a once living wizard. > > Cedric Diggory was transfiguring a rock into a living dog etc. etc. > Why not a train of thoughts or a pile of documents - or a crammed > waste basket, even - into a brain? kjirstem: Perhaps, but it seems so crude. The Pensieve seems like a much better way to store information, IMHO. And, if the unspeakables are using these brains to study Thought or Memory, real brains would be better to work with than transfigured rocks. Otherwise they could be gathering information that is erroneous due to mistakes made in the transfiguration. From jlnbtr at yahoo.com Fri Nov 12 03:48:20 2004 From: jlnbtr at yahoo.com (Juli) Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 19:48:20 -0800 (PST) Subject: McGonagall giving points (Was Re: Who took more points from Gryffindors) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041112034820.78970.qmail@web53102.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 117676 > Potioncat: > Didn't she give points to Harry and Ron for fighting > the troll in SS? Or is that movie contamination? Juli: I don't have my book here either, but I'm pretty sure she gave Ron and Harry points, but I couldn't bet my life on it. And I think I also remember her giving Hermione points for answering a transformation question. Sorry I can't quote JKR on this... From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Fri Nov 12 06:04:26 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Fri, 12 Nov 2004 06:04:26 -0000 Subject: Inside Harry's mind In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117677 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "arrowsmithbt" wrote: > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "annemehr" wrote: > > > > > > > Kneasy: > > > But if it's not an impression, if, as canon suggests, it is a part > > of Voldy.... > > > Under such circumstances even Dudders would be a super-wizard. > > > > Annemehr: > > Whoa! I don't think we can go as far as to say that he had such a huge > > effect on Harry. Dumbledore did say LV transferred *some* of his > > powers. Apparently [she said dryly] he did not transfer to Harry the > > power to charm the people he needed. We're not sure if "some of his > > powers" means only certain individual talents (such as Parseltongue), > > or also a general increase in magical ability. But to me, "some" > > doesn't even mean as much as "most." > > > > I seemed to have been working on my previous post at the same time you > > were doing yours, and in it I explained why I thought we should be > > careful about interpreting Harry's words about a bit of Volemort. The > > possibilities are endless, but the conclusion can be few. I'm > > perfectly happy to explore their implications, but I'm not betting any > > real money on any of them. > > > > Ah. But. On the other hand and taking all things into consideration, > is it possible for unattached powers to exist? The way I look at it is > if I said you can use my eyesight, but I keep my eyes. Wouldn't work. > Magical skills are in and of the wizard that learns them IMO, otherwise > they could just be inhaled in the classroom from a jar of 'magic'. > But as we know it's bloody hard work learning spells, there is no > short cut. Unless something that has *already* learned them takes > up residence in your mind. > > You may not agree, but I'm taking "a bit of himself" literally. It's more > than just powers, it's part of Voldy's spirit, mind, anima that's in there. > And it's that anima that generates, or originally generated, the Voldy > powers that Harry now has for himself. > > Kneasy Carol notes: But not all powers are learned. A few (Parseltongue, flying ability, skill at Quidditch) appear to be innate or genetically inherited. It appears that James had an inborn talent for Transfiguration and Lily for Charms, even though they had to learn the particular spells in order to use those talents. Also some untrained wizards (eleven-year-olds) have more power than others, and the wands can sense that. I think Tom Riddle's wand sense his innate but latent power and Harry's sensed both his inborn latent powers and those he acquired from Voldemort when Voldemort inadvertently "marked him as his equal." I don't think Voldie lost his own powers, though he lost the ability to *use* any except possession (you can't use a wand without a body), any more than transplanting jellyfish DNA into a rabbit embryo causes the jellyfish to lose its identity as a jellyfish. I think Harry was born with powers similar to those of his parents, who were talented and fairly powerful wizards but nowhere near as powerful as Tom Riddle (putting the memory of yourself into a diary so that you can possess the person who confides in it is no mean feat). But the bit of Voldie that entered his mind gave him additional powers that he was not born with, powers which, when fully developed, will make him Voldie's equal. IMO, the venomous anger he's been feeling in OoP, but not in the earlier books, is something new and different, a strengthening of the bond created by the scar and/or the deliberate manipulation of Harry's emotions by Voldemort. It's not part of Voldie that has always been in him. And the traits that might have placed him in Slytherin had he not protested, presumably the "thirst to prove himself," could as easily be an inheritance from show off James, who liked to be admired, as the more obviously ambitious Voldemort. At any rate, there's no mention of cunning or an attraction to the Dark Arts, presumably the traits that made the hat instantly scream "Slytherin!" when it touched Draco Malfoy's head. Carol From tonks_op at yahoo.com Fri Nov 12 06:49:55 2004 From: tonks_op at yahoo.com (Tonks) Date: Fri, 12 Nov 2004 06:49:55 -0000 Subject: =?iso-8859-1?q?Re:_JKR=92s_giant_mistake=3F?= In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117678 Very interesting research on the Voldemort name issue. You might be onto something. Maybe when the name is used by someone other that those who are not afraid of him, or are not his followers, it is because they are in someway at that moment possessed by him. Or maybe by having the 's on it.. *Voldemort's followers* for example, it is not the same as saying it directly. Or maybe the fear in others is that saying it will bring him, and the people who do say it and are his followers anyway don't mind if he comes around, but when he is around they show respect for him by using his title instead. Tonks_op From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Fri Nov 12 07:00:19 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Fri, 12 Nov 2004 07:00:19 -0000 Subject: The Riddles' Murders (WAS: The only one he ever feared? In-Reply-To: <20041111112409.35894.qmail@web52909.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117679 Kim wrote: > > And I'll toss out this last question: who do you think taught young Tom Riddle how to perform an Avada Kedavra? < > JP responded: > > I think that Tom had "theoretically" known how to use the AK Curse, you know, Knowing the incatation and everything... Let's also remember that Tom Jr. is a gifted Hogwarts Student and he probably did the curses first on animals. and i don't think that the Unforgivable Curses is that hard to do. In OotP, Harry had used the Crucio Curse on Bella and it worked... for a little while... and remember what bella said? I dont have my book with me but I think that she said that anger doesn't make the curse effective... the user must mean it... savor the pleasure on hurting or killing someone in order to use it properly. And I think that Tom Jr did: he meant to kill his family, and following logically the attitude of the present day Voldy, had the pleasure of doing so. Carol notes: IIRC, Crouch!Moody tells the fourth years that even if they all pointed their wands at him and yelled "Avada Kedavra," he doubted that he'd get as much as a nosebleed. While he may have been exaggerating (partly for his own protection), it seems clear that two things are required to perform an Unforgiveable Curse effectively: power and the will to harm or control another person. Bellatrix's sadism, her vicious desire to inflict prolonged suffering on others, makes her a Crucio expert, but she seems to have learned from Voldie himself. No doubt she could perform the others as well, but without the savage satisfaction. Barty Jr., another powerful young wizard, seems to have been motivated by fanaticism and hatred of his father to learn all three Unforgiveables. Young Tom Riddle's cold hatred of his father and his contempt for Muggleborns gave him the incentive to learn Avada Kedavra at seventeen, quite possibly on his own, but we know that he was an extraordinarily powerful wizard and had already killed using the basilisk. I don't think just anybody, even a powerful full-grown wizard, can perform an Unforgiveable Curse. Sirius Black, I think, could have managed to do it after all the time he had spent hating Peter Pettigrew and plotting his murder. But Lupin, who has barely had time to accept that Pettigrew and not Black is the traitor? Maybe all that would have come out of his wand if he had tried would be a wisp of green vapor. Imagine if the Unforgiveables weren't difficult. Instead of magically shoving walnuts up family member's noses during family arguments, teenagers would shout, "I'll kill you! Avada Kedavra!" and the offending family member would be dead. You have to be powerfully motivated to kill or torture or manipulate others to perform them correctly. And for that reason, the Curses are not only illegal but Unforgiveable. Carol From gbannister10 at aol.com Fri Nov 12 07:46:38 2004 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Fri, 12 Nov 2004 07:46:38 -0000 Subject: The Riddles' Murders (WAS: The only one he ever feared? In-Reply-To: <20041111112409.35894.qmail@web52909.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117680 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, jp velasco wrote: JP: > I think that Tom had "theoretically" known how to use the AK Curse, you know, Knowing the incatation and everything... Let's also remember that Tom Jr. is a gifted Hogwarts Student and he probably did the curses first on animals. and i don't think that the Unforgivable Curses is that hard to do. Geoff: How do you square that with Crouch!Moody's comment in GOF? "Avadra Kedavra's a curse that needs a powerful bit of magic behind it - you could all get your wands out now and point them at me and say the words and I doubt I'd get so much as a nose-bleed...." (GOF "The Unforgiveable Curses" p.192 UK edition) In OOTP, Bellatrix refers to really "wanting" to hurt someone - this suggests that there has to be magical power (and experience?) as well. From R.Vink2 at chello.nl Fri Nov 12 10:38:47 2004 From: R.Vink2 at chello.nl (Renee) Date: Fri, 12 Nov 2004 10:38:47 -0000 Subject: =?iso-8859-1?q?Re:_JKR=92s_giant_mistake=3F?= In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117681 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Tonks" wrote: > > Very interesting research on the Voldemort name issue. You might be > onto something. Maybe when the name is used by someone other that > those who are not afraid of him, or are not his followers, it is > because they are in someway at that moment possessed by him. Or > maybe by having the 's on it.. *Voldemort's followers* for example, > it is not the same as saying it directly. Renee: This doesn't work for translations into Romance languages like French, Italian and Spanish, as they use a preposition instead of a genitive form. It's hard to imagine that JKR, who has a degree in French, wouldn't have realised such a thing. Tonks_op: Or maybe the fear in > others is that saying it will bring him, and the people who do say > it and are his followers anyway don't mind if he comes around, but > when he is around they show respect for him by using his title > instead. Renee: This doesn't explain Crouch Senior in the GoF Pensieve scene (the lack of any reactions included), let alone Pettigrew's use of the name in the Shrieking Shack, so shortly after he flinched when Sirius used it. My guess is that nobody used any search function at all to look for misplaced Voldemorts, and that JKR and the editors quite simply overlooked them. There are five instances of 'suspicious' use: two in PS/SS, one in PoA and two in Gof. That's at most two per book (one of which is very long) and none in two of the five books. Not really very much. It's easy to miss such things, even for editors or proofreaders. As a professional translator, I do a lot of proofreading of my own translations, I get to see the results of the editors' work and I read the galley proofs. I know from experience that at *all* these stages, mistakes still manage to slip through. Also, in the course of many years, I've spotted quite a few mistakes in the originals I translated that everyone, from the original authors to the readers of the galley proofs, managed to overlook. (I know this because I usually contact the authors when I come across something that looks like a mistake, and they either confirm it is one, or tell me it isn't.) And sometimes mistakes I didn't see were spotted by an editor. And these are not typos; we're talking about content here, and still such mistakes are easily made. Given the flints found elsewhere in the HP series, it's not unthinkable that these five suspicious Voldemorts have simply been overlooked. And then again, maybe not. I guess this is one of those instances where I *would* like to know what the author has to say... Renee From moonmyyst13 at yahoo.com Fri Nov 12 11:25:00 2004 From: moonmyyst13 at yahoo.com (K G) Date: Fri, 12 Nov 2004 03:25:00 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: A few random puzzles In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041112112500.52971.qmail@web53508.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 117682 kizor0 wrote: > 3. In the Pensieve, Bertha Jorkins appears and delivers the >famous lines that have us all so baffled: "He put a hex on me, >Professor Dumbledore, and I was only teasing him, sir, I only said >I'd seen him kissing Florence behind the greenhouses last >Thursday . . . " "But why, Bertha," said Dumbledore sadly, >looking up at the now silently revolving girl, "why did you have >to follow him in the first place." > > For this Bertha Jorkins stuff to be important to make it into the > Pensieve and for Dumbledore to still be sad about it, >the "kissing" has to be more than garden-variety kissing. So I >wonder if Bertha saw Snape, who is half-dementor, administering >the Kiss to someone. Or maybe he is a vampire, and what Bertha >mistakes for a kiss is really a bite. Personally, I'm overcautious about running into new Mark Evanses. Do we have good reason to suspect that the boy and Florence are a Significant Plot Point, instead of just an example of Jorkins' character? The theory about a half-dementor Snape is a quite intriguing one, and certainly original, but... how many people do *you* know who would procreate with a dementor? - Kizor, who is somewhat sorry for giving you the mental image I am still having trouble wrapping my mind around Hagrid's "little" dad and his giantess mom!! List elves please excuse the OT reply but my 6:00am brain just had no will power!! moonmyyst (who will go and hide in the back room now!!) --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From willsonkmom at msn.com Fri Nov 12 12:42:43 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Fri, 12 Nov 2004 12:42:43 -0000 Subject: Hagrid's attack on Dudley (Was: A few random puzzles) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117683 >>>Alla > > I am also not getting your point about Hagrid being prejudiced >about all muggles. He is prejudiced about Dursleys,sure( very >deservingly so, IMO). He calls them muggles, because that is who >they are. > > Could you give me a quote,where Hagrld calls all muggles worthless, > please? Potioncat: Alla was responding to Carol's post that Hagrid is prejudiced against Muggles. I actually think she might be right. And McGonagall might be prejudiced too. McGonagall says the Dursleys are the worst sort of Muggles. That sort of puts it on a continuum. At one end you distrust Muggles but accept a Muggleborn witch. At the other end you extend your dislike of Muggles to MagicFolk with Muggle blood. >>Alla: > Another idea - if Harry indeed was watched closely than he would > ever know when he was with Dursleys, maybe Hagrid was one of those > who watched hima nd then he saw every cruel trick Dudley played on > hima nd that is why Hagrid PLANNED to turn Dudley into a pig, > because he ahd plenty of time to plan him. > > This one I may believe in actually Potioncat: First, if that was the case, it was revenge, not punishment. Giving someone a paper to write for not paying attention in class is punishment. Breaking their potion sample is revenge...oops wrong argument. Giving someone a pigs tale but not explaining why is not punishment, but revenge. Secondly, I don't think anyone, even DD knew what was going on at the Dursleys. I know the letters seemed to know exactly where Harry was sleeping, but I think that was a different situation. From mgrantwich at yahoo.com Fri Nov 12 13:22:53 2004 From: mgrantwich at yahoo.com (Magda Grantwich) Date: Fri, 12 Nov 2004 05:22:53 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Why has DD never suggested Snape thank Harry? (Was: Why has DD never suggest In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041112132253.89287.qmail@web53106.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 117684 > Alla: > > I think that Harry will need more than THREE DAYS to "fully > recover" from the lost of Sirius. The world is not going to be put on hold because someone has lost a loved one. Harry was (to an observor) out of line and not at all remorseful about it. Snape was acting like a strict teacher and an anti-Harry teacher in front of the sons of three Death Eaters. Being compassionate at that moment would have been foolish of Snape. Magda __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com From willsonkmom at msn.com Fri Nov 12 14:10:01 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Fri, 12 Nov 2004 14:10:01 -0000 Subject: Why has DD never suggested Snape thank Harry? (Was: Why has DD never suggest In-Reply-To: <20041112132253.89287.qmail@web53106.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117685 Magda: > The world is not going to be put on hold because someone has lost a > loved one. Harry was (to an observor) out of line and not at all > remorseful about it. Snape was acting like a strict teacher and an > anti-Harry teacher in front of the sons of three Death Eaters. Being > compassionate at that moment would have been foolish of Snape. Potioncat: We've touched on McGonagall a bit in this thread. Had she been the one to walk in on the scene, and had she been given the same answer Snape was, IMHO, Harry would have gotten a tongue lashing as well as losing points. From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com Fri Nov 12 14:43:01 2004 From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (arrowsmithbt) Date: Fri, 12 Nov 2004 14:43:01 -0000 Subject: Consider the source was Re: A few random puzzles In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117686 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "potioncat" wrote: > > Kneasy: > snip > You know that memory, the arguing couple > > and the child? That was chez Snape - Sevvy and Flo, plus Snape!Son. > > It was what happened to them that made him leave Voldy, you know. > > Terribly sad. Never got over it. Always quarreling, but some > couples are like that; but let anybody else poke their noses in and > there's hell to pay. > > Potioncat: > Whether or not the memory we saw was Little Severus and his parents, > or Young Family Man Severus, I think you are on to something. I'm > sure there was a family that was destroyed by the Dark Lord himself. > > Good bet, I think. There's even rumours that the child may not be the only fruit to spring from Snape's loins, that there may be more. Wouldn't know anything about that, would you? Kneasy From willsonkmom at msn.com Fri Nov 12 15:00:44 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Fri, 12 Nov 2004 15:00:44 -0000 Subject: Family Ties was Consider the source was Re: A few random puzzles In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117687 Kneasy wrote: > Good bet, I think. > There's even rumours that the child may not be the only fruit to spring > from Snape's loins, that there may be more. > Wouldn't know anything about that, would you? > Potioncat: Yes, I do, but I am more likely to reveal things I know nothing about than to tell things I do know. However, along those lines but in a different direction. Once upon a time a few posters were intrigued with the idea that one (or possible both) of the Mystery Slytherins were described in terms similar to those used to describe Teenaged Severus. We now know (or think) the person described as "weedy" was Theo Nott. Lots of us wonder what will happen to this poor boy, no mother and his father in prison. But what if he has family around? And who could it be? The one who seems obvious, or someone else? "Ron,Dear, I'm putting a cot in your room. A distant cousin of yours needs a place to stay over the summer." Potioncat (Thanks for the laugh!) From foxmoth at qnet.com Fri Nov 12 15:29:10 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Fri, 12 Nov 2004 15:29:10 -0000 Subject: =?iso-8859-1?q?Re:_JKR=92s_giant_mistake=3F?= In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117688 Renee: > And these are not typos; we're talking about content here, and still such mistakes are easily made. Given the flints found elsewhere in the HP series, it's not unthinkable that these five suspicious Voldemorts have simply been overlooked. And then again, maybe not. I guess this is one of those instances where I *would* like to know what the author has to say...< > I think it's a reader superstition that bad guys can't say "Voldemort", very carefully planted by JKR herself. Here's the text: "Well," said Lupin, frowning slightly, "I assumed that if the boggart faced you, it would assume the shape of Lord Voldemort." Harry stared. Not only was this the last answer he'd expected, but Lupin had said Voldemort's name. The only person Harry had ever heard say the name aloud (apart from himself) was Professor Dumbledore. --PoA ch 8 The narrator's recollection is inaccurate, since Quirrell used the name, and so did Hagrid (PS/SS ch 4). It isn't the only inaccurate recollection in the chapter, since we're told Harry "honestly" said he didn't think of Voldemort before he thought of the dementors. To me, as a puzzle hound, that's a clue, though I suppose they could both be oversights. It's kind of odd that all the supposed oversights and flints should point one way. I mean, we never get oversights that point to Lucius as a secret good guy, do we? I'd be inclined to wonder about the honorific "Lord", but alas, Dumbledore uses it (CoS ch 18). I think it's significant in itself that we yearn to have some simple means of sorting the sheep from the lambs, even though the characters who lived through the first Voldemort war tell us there was no such method. They couldn't tell who to trust, even among their closest friends. Pippin From willsonkmom at msn.com Fri Nov 12 15:51:36 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Fri, 12 Nov 2004 15:51:36 -0000 Subject: Waiting for Godot Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117689 I was checking over at the Lexicon to find out when each of the HP books was first published. I found that Chamber of Secrets and Prisoner of Azkaban both came out in 1999. Not believing it, I took a low tech approach and looked in my own books. Sure enough, two books came out in the same year! I can't imagine having a book come out before having sufficient time to discuss every punctuation mark in the previous book! Was anyone around back then and did these discussion sites exist? Potioncat hoping this is canon and not OT. (Yes, it must be, 1999 appears in the book, whew, that was close....) From foxmoth at qnet.com Fri Nov 12 15:59:11 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Fri, 12 Nov 2004 15:59:11 -0000 Subject: Hagrid's attack on Dudley (Was: A few random puzzles) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117690 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "dumbledore11214" wrote: > Another idea - if Harry indeed was watched closely than he would ever know when he was with Dursleys, maybe Hagrid was one of those who watched hima nd then he saw every cruel trick Dudley played on him and that is why Hagrid PLANNED to turn Dudley into a pig, because he ahd plenty of time to plan him. > > This one I may believe in actually Pippin: Nope. If he'd planned it, he wouldn't have done it in front of three witnesses. If he had succeeded in turning Dudley into a pig, Hagrid would have been in trouble with the Improper Use of Magic Office, especially if he hadn't been able to turn him back. Hagrid lost his temper. He's done that other times, in GoF when he roughs up Karkaroff, and at the end of OOP when he's resisting arrest. He starts to lose it in CoS, when he's about to be arrested, but Dumbledore tells him "sharply" to calm himself. Having lost it, Hagrid wasn't thinking reasonably. Vernon was giving him a hard time, Dudley was there, kid looks like a pig already, especially compared to scrawny little Harry, how dare he... ZAP! At some level Hagrid probably doesn't think a magical person like him should have to take any guff from a "mere" Muggle, though if you asked him whether wizards should be allowed to bully Muggles, I'm sure he'd say no. Also, Hagrid seems far too unfamiliar with the Muggle world to have spent much time watching Harry. Pippin From hautbois1 at comcast.net Fri Nov 12 16:27:58 2004 From: hautbois1 at comcast.net (ohnooboe) Date: Fri, 12 Nov 2004 16:27:58 -0000 Subject: Magical ability detected at birth (was Re: Evans family) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117691 > Kelly: > > What I don't understand is how the book *knows* that a baby is > magical. It might assume a baby born to magical parents is also > magical, but does it *know* a muggle born (like Hermione or the > Creevys) is magical at birth, or does it wait for evidence when the > child makes strange things happen? Patrick here: I think we all assume there has to be an explination for magic. Magic just is. I think JKR said this in some form, at some time...or perhaps I dreamt it. Either way, it works because it was charmed or created to do just that. Just like the Knight bus runs on magic (unless there's some sort of WW gas station?) this book runs on magic. Perhaps it senses a shift in the "magical tides" and locates the cause. Who knows... Patrick...whose favorite line from "Shakespeare in Love" is: "It's a mystery." So fitting... From sopraniste at yahoo.com Fri Nov 12 06:49:53 2004 From: sopraniste at yahoo.com (Maria Holub) Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 22:49:53 -0800 (PST) Subject: Brain room In-Reply-To: <1100136082.4781.98617.m22@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <20041112064953.85277.qmail@web41214.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 117692 Just a trippy sort of thought that's been bouncing around in my brain: What if they never WERE somebody's brains? I'm toying with this wild concept of the MoM developing sort of "free-standing" brains kind of as a data-storage thing like Wizard computer hard-drives?... Okay, that's wilder than it sounded before I typed it out. Any thoughts?... Flop From sopraniste at yahoo.com Fri Nov 12 06:58:22 2004 From: sopraniste at yahoo.com (Maria Holub) Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 22:58:22 -0800 (PST) Subject: Quirrel In-Reply-To: <1100181564.6596.77960.m22@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <20041112065822.17461.qmail@web41207.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 117693 khinterberg said: > It has always bothered me that in the last chapter of PS/SS Quirrell says Voldemort's name. > Why, when Death Eaters won't even say his name, can a young professor with Vapormort on the back of his head say it without any sign of fear whatsoever?< I really think you put your finger on it there. Vapormort was on the back of his head. He was POSSESSED by Vapormort! Although he was able to keep some of his own personality so that others wouldn't suspect, I really think that this was, in effect, Voldemort saying his OWN name. Flop From sopraniste at yahoo.com Fri Nov 12 07:03:25 2004 From: sopraniste at yahoo.com (Maria Holub) Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 23:03:25 -0800 (PST) Subject: arthur weasley In-Reply-To: <1100181564.6596.77960.m22@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <20041112070325.71236.qmail@web41204.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 117694 kmc said: > Is there some legend somewhere about when a daughter is born to one of three brothers xxxxxxxx will happen? Or anything about girls popping up in families of all boys? I don't know about that, but there is significance to being the SEVENTH child, which Ginny most definitely IS. They are seen to have special powers. GO GINNY! Flop From griffin782002 at yahoo.com Fri Nov 12 17:14:22 2004 From: griffin782002 at yahoo.com (sp. sot.) Date: Fri, 12 Nov 2004 09:14:22 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Hagrid's attack on Dudley (Was: A few random puzzles) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041112171422.87839.qmail@web52710.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 117695 potioncat wrote: (EDIT) Potioncat: Alla was responding to Carol's post that Hagrid is prejudiced against Muggles. I actually think she might be right. And McGonagall might be prejudiced too. McGonagall says the Dursleys are the worst sort of Muggles. That sort of puts it on a continuum. At one end you distrust Muggles but accept a Muggleborn witch. At the other end you extend your dislike of Muggles to MagicFolk with Muggle blood. Griffin782002 now: I disagree a little with potioncat. Although Hagrid does seem to be prejudiced against Muggles, I don't think McGonagall is prejudiced. If I read it correctly, Mcgonagall says that they are the worst short of Muggles. It seems to me that there must a better sort of Muggles. I don't think she would say that for the Grangers. I hope I made my points clear. Griffin782002 who on Wednesday turned 26!!!! :-) --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From willsonkmom at msn.com Fri Nov 12 17:49:46 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Fri, 12 Nov 2004 17:49:46 -0000 Subject: Hagrid's attack on Dudley (Was: A few random puzzles) In-Reply-To: <20041112171422.87839.qmail@web52710.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117696 > Griffin782002 now: > > I disagree a little with potioncat. Although Hagrid does seem to be prejudiced against Muggles, I don't think McGonagall is prejudiced. If I read it correctly, Mcgonagall says that they are the worst short of Muggles. It seems to me that there must a better sort of Muggles. I don't think she would say that for the Grangers. > > I hope I made my points clear. > > Griffin782002 who on Wednesday turned 26!!!! :-) Potioncat: Let me quickly say that I don't think McGonagall or Hargrid are bigots. And I think all of us have a point where we are leary of "others." So you could have the worst sort of Muggles; or someone who very nice, for a Muggle; or someone who doesn't seem like a Muggle at all. But I think Muggles are different enough to Hagrid and McGonagall to seem a bit strange, at best. Potioncat who turns more than 26 on Monday. From annemehr at yahoo.com Fri Nov 12 18:30:08 2004 From: annemehr at yahoo.com (annemehr) Date: Fri, 12 Nov 2004 18:30:08 -0000 Subject: Waiting for Godot In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117697 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "potioncat" wrote: > > I was checking over at the Lexicon to find out when each of the HP > books was first published. I found that Chamber of Secrets and > Prisoner of Azkaban both came out in 1999. Not believing it, I took > a low tech approach and looked in my own books. Sure enough, two > books came out in the same year! > > I can't imagine having a book come out before having sufficient time > to discuss every punctuation mark in the previous book! Was anyone > around back then and did these discussion sites exist? > > Potioncat hoping this is canon and not OT. (Yes, it must be, 1999 > appears in the book, whew, that was close....) Ah, it's time for a history lesson! :) Actually, it was Prisoner of Azkaban that was the first one to be published simultaneously by Bloomsbury and Scholastic. Chamber of Secrets was published earlier in Great Britain than it was here in the States. Checking my Bloomsbury CoS paperback, it says: First Published in Great Britain in 1998 also: Copyright (c) Text J.K.Rowling 1998 Copyright (c) Cover illustration Cliff Wright 1997 So that spreads things out a bit. Incidentally, Philosopher's Stone has both text and cover illustration (c) 1997. Annemehr From technomad at intergate.com Fri Nov 12 18:54:18 2004 From: technomad at intergate.com (ericoppen) Date: Fri, 12 Nov 2004 18:54:18 -0000 Subject: Bella's Backstory Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117698 You know, I'd dearly love to hear Bellatrix Lestrange's story---how it was that she became what she now is. If it's true that you "have to mean" the Cruciatus Curse, then what was it that teed her off that badly? I mean---I have serious anger issues myself (as I've said before and will say again, in Harry's boots I could have Cruciatus'd Bella to a crackly crunch, no problem) even I would have to work myself up to it. She seems to be able to Cruciatus people she's never met before that did nothing to her or to anybody she cares about *cough Neville cough cough*---so where does she get that apparent bottomless well of rage? It can't be from being tossed into Azkaban, since she was apparently the DEs' Cruciatus specialist before Godric's Hollow. So---what do you think got her so furious at the world? *grin* Was Rabastan _that_ lousy a husband? From technomad at intergate.com Fri Nov 12 19:11:15 2004 From: technomad at intergate.com (ericoppen) Date: Fri, 12 Nov 2004 19:11:15 -0000 Subject: Is Dudley...slow? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117699 I've sometimes wondered if a lot of Petunia's attitudes couldn't be explained by saying that Dudley's...slow of wit. What I think is now called a "special-needs child", although the PC authorities may have come up with fresh euphemisms. If she and Vernon knew they had a child with special needs, that would explain a lot of their resentment of Harry. Here they are, with the child they had longed for turning out defective, and, to rub it in, they get their already-unwanted nephew, son of Petunia's much- resented sister-who-was-the-star-of-the-family, dumped on them, and he's bright and normal! Having a child like the sort I'm referring to is really, really hard on the parents, and some of them take refuge in proving that denial isn't just a river in Egypt. They'll insist long and loud that their precious child is _normal,_ and don't you dare forget it, Mister! If anything, they're even more protective of their children than ordinary parents...and doesn't _that_ sound familiar? I can't remember anything at all in canon that implies that Dudley's even normally intelligent. He never reads (while reading wasn't as big a thing for my classmates as it was for me, they all could and did), his grades are lousy, and he often behaves a lot like a person a lot younger than his chronological age. True, he got into Smeltings---but not being familiar with that sort of pseudo-public- school, I don't know whether or how much Vernon was able to pull strings to get him in. About the only school system I'm personally familiar with is the US public system. About the only thing in canon that militates against my theory is that Dudley, unlike _most_ mentally-slow children, has a nasty disposition. However, that doesn't mean anything in and of itself; _most_ such people are gentle and sweet, but that doesn't preclude individual variance. Comments? *donning Howlerproof armour* From finwitch at yahoo.com Fri Nov 12 19:14:24 2004 From: finwitch at yahoo.com (finwitch) Date: Fri, 12 Nov 2004 19:14:24 -0000 Subject: Apparition lessons (was Re: Draco's POV?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117700 > > Potioncat: > Hmm, why do you supose JKR has told us so many times that no one can > Apparate inside the Hogwarts grounds? Are we getting too comfortable > with that information? What do you think would happen if someone > forgot, and tried to Apparate? Some poor sleep deprived 7th year > late for Potions class? I'd be surprised if no one had ever tried > it. I mean, knowing how many students have a disregard for rules... Finwitch: Now, I think they have a theory test - and practical test, and one can't take the practical test unless they've passed the theory (including some sort of 'traffic' rules etc.) And I do believe there are professional Apparation teachers, but that parents can also teach... Well, just thinking that - with all the adults among Weasleys (possibly excluding Percy), they could teach Ron, Harry & Hermione. I suppose lessons can start early, (after OWLs?) but you're to take the test after (or as) you turn 17. (Meaning it gets to wait until book 7). Also, Hogwarts, A History says one *can't* disapparate from Hogwarts grounds - not that it's forbidden. (And Dumbledore doesn't do so when Fudge tried to arrest him - and I'd say that flying off with Fawkes is much more impressive-looking than just disappearing! - and AD could have pretended to disapparate, but only become invisible...) Finwitch From manawydan at ntlworld.com Fri Nov 12 19:28:19 2004 From: manawydan at ntlworld.com (manawydan) Date: Fri, 12 Nov 2004 19:28:19 -0000 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Apparition lessons (was Re: Draco's POV?) References: <1100224453.4109.57849.m4@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <001401c4c8ed$c55e1c20$704b6d51@f3b7j4> No: HPFGUIDX 117701 Steve wrote: >Next, we have never seen the Room provide anything /active/ like a >portkey. It provided space, books, bookshelves, pillows/cushions, and >various magical instruments (Foe Detectors/secrecy sensors). I suspect >the magical instruments are only valid and active within the confines >of the Room. That is on the assumption that the magical devices were >created by the Room itself. Harry says that he suspects that the Foe >Glass was the Glass that once belonged to Mad Eye Moody. If that is >true then the Room summoned it from somewhere in the castle; it didn't >create it. That instrument would work inside or outside the Room, >because it wasn't created by the Room. {snippage} >So, getting into The Room from outside Hogwarts would be difficult, >and relying on any object created by The Room, outside The Room, would >not be reliable or advisable. I think I'm right that Dobby mentions Filch using the room to replenish his cleaning supplies if he ran out unexpectedly. Therefore it must be able to create things that can be taken outside and still exist. There's no canon support as to whether Argus uses magical cleaning materials (Mrs Skower's for example) but it's probably because why would there be any other sort in the WW? So in that small respect the RoR must be able to generate magical "stuff". I'd like to think, also, that Dumbledore, having utilised one of the chamber pots, would have taken it to the nearest toilet to empty it without it, um, dissolving as he walked down the corridor... cheers Ffred O Benryn wleth hyd Luch Reon Cymru yn unfryd gerhyd Wrion Gwret dy Cymry yghymeiri From nkafkafi at yahoo.com Fri Nov 12 19:31:30 2004 From: nkafkafi at yahoo.com (nkafkafi) Date: Fri, 12 Nov 2004 19:31:30 -0000 Subject: =?iso-8859-1?q?Re:_JKR=92s_giant_mistake=3F?= In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117702 > Pippin : > I think it's a reader superstition that bad guys can't say > "Voldemort", very carefully planted by JKR herself. > Neri: If JKR carefully planted a false notion in us, then I believe the technical term for it is "red herring" and not "reader superstition". Of course, almost any clue in the books might be a red herring, including suspicions pointing to Lupin ;-). There isn't in fact any canon that the bad guys CAN'T say the name, only that they, like many of the good guys, rather won't. > Pippin: > Here's the text: > > Harry stared. Not only was this the last answer he'd expected, > but Lupin had said Voldemort's name. The only person Harry > had ever heard say the name aloud (apart from himself) was > Professor Dumbledore. --PoA ch 8 > > The narrator's recollection is inaccurate, since Quirrell used the > name, and so did Hagrid (PS/SS ch 4). > Neri: You forgot that Harry also heard Tom Riddle saying the name several times in CoS. However, it would have been slightly cumbersome for JKR to write a sentence such as: "The only person Harry had ever heard say the name aloud (apart from himself, Hagrid once and very reluctantly, Quirrell when he was possessed by Voldemort, and Tom Riddle who was of course Voldemort himself) was Professor Dumbledore." Hagrid, Quirrell and Riddle are so clearly special exceptions to the rule that they don't even have to be considered. I don't think this specific case is a flint. > Pippin : > It isn't the only inaccurate > recollection in the chapter, since we're told Harry "honestly" said > he didn't think of Voldemort before he thought of the dementors. > To me, as a puzzle hound, that's a clue, though I suppose they > could both be oversights. Neri: I don't think they are both oversights. I think they are both examples of reasonable writing style. Harry doesn't say "honestly" that he didn't think of Voldemort BEFORE he thought of the dementors. He says honestly that he didn't think about Voldemort BUT about the dementors, and the fact that he did consider Voldemort for a very short time isn't relevant and would have only made the text needlessly cumbersome had he mentioned it. I'm sure it is possible to find several such "oversights" in any chapter, or the characters would have to talk in sentences twice as long. > Pippin : > It's kind of odd that all the supposed oversights and flints should > point one way. I mean, we never get oversights that point to > Lucius as a secret good guy, do we? Neri: I'm not sure what you mean by that. Saying the name "Voldemort" regularly does point to DD, Harry, Lupin, Sirius and Hermione as "really brave guys" (not "really good guys", since many good guys don't say the name). The three cases that I suspect to be mistakes are all said just once by three different characters (Wormtail, Crouch Sr and Crouch Jr) as you would indeed expect from a random mistake. > Pippin : > I think it's significant in itself > that we yearn to have some simple means of sorting the sheep > from the lambs, even though the characters who lived through > the first Voldemort war tell us there was no such method. They > couldn't tell who to trust, even among their closest friends. > Neri: Saying the name "Voldemort" doesn't sort the sheep from the lambs, but it does seem to sort the lions from all the rest (and disregarding the obvious exceptions of Voldemort himself and whoever is possessed by him). It couldn't have been used during VWI to tell friend from foe, since most of the good guys don't dare saying the name either, and in fact are rather antagonized by those who do. Neri From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Fri Nov 12 19:45:15 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Fri, 12 Nov 2004 19:45:15 -0000 Subject: Magical ability detected at birth (was Re: Evans family) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117703 Kelly: > > What I don't understand is how the book *knows* that a baby is > > magical. It might assume a baby born to magical parents is also > > magical, but does it *know* a muggle born (like Hermione or the > > Creevys) is magical at birth, or does it wait for evidence when > > the child makes strange things happen? Patrick here: > I think we all assume there has to be an explination for magic. > Magic just is. I think JKR said this in some form, at some > time...or perhaps I dreamt it. Either way, it works because it was > charmed or created to do just that. Just like the Knight bus runs > on magic (unless there's some sort of WW gas station?) this book > runs on magic. Perhaps it senses a shift in the "magical tides" > and locates the cause. Who knows... > > Patrick...whose favorite line from "Shakespeare in Love" is: > "It's a mystery." So fitting... SSSusan: Or just like the owls just *know* how to find their assigned addressee...and like the envelopes *know* [I presume] how to re- address themselves when their addressee moves on to a different location. You know what I mean? It's not just that the letters came addressed with the highly specific *Cupboard under the Stairs* line at first, it's that they kept coming properly addressed as Harry & the Dursleys moved from spot to spot. IOW, it's just magic! Siriusly Snapey Susan From willsonkmom at msn.com Fri Nov 12 20:28:45 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Fri, 12 Nov 2004 20:28:45 -0000 Subject: Is Dudley...slow? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117704 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "ericoppen" wrote: > > I've sometimes wondered if a lot of Petunia's attitudes couldn't be > explained by saying that Dudley's...slow of wit. What I think is now > called a "special-needs child", although the PC authorities may have > come up with fresh euphemisms. Potioncat: I'd say Dudley, Crabbe and Goyle are all shown as pretty stupid. It's great fun to laugh at their weight, their mental skills, their sheer brutish behavior. Unless of course you think about it too much. I'm one of at least two (I'm sure more) on this list who do not agree with psychological explanations for characters. I don't think you can diagnose fictional characters unless the author intended to portray a certain condition. It doesn't mean the author has to say, "This character is BiPolar, this character is Autistic". It just doesn't work unless the author intended it AND knew what she/he was doing. So while I think Dudley is pretty dim-witted, I don't think it is a Special-Needs situation. Potioncat (who knows more than she wants to about special-needs.) From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Fri Nov 12 20:28:33 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Fri, 12 Nov 2004 20:28:33 -0000 Subject: Why has DD never suggested Snape thank Harry? (Was: Why has DD never suggest In-Reply-To: <20041112132253.89287.qmail@web53106.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117705 Magda: > The world is not going to be put on hold because someone has lost a > loved one. Harry was (to an observor) out of line and not at all > remorseful about it. Snape was acting like a strict teacher and an > anti-Harry teacher in front of the sons of three Death Eaters. Being > compassionate at that moment would have been foolish of Snape. Alla: Didn't Snape hear the whole conversation? I may be wrong, since no books with me right now, but that is my recollection. Right now I will argue that he knew that Malfoy was out of line first. And I never thought that theory "Snape has to maintain his cover" was very strong. It seems more logical to me that if Snape is still a double agent, he has to be double nice to Harry - to convince Vodelmort that Dumbledore believes that Snape can be trusted (you know treat the Boy who lived as friend, not an enemy) To make a long story short - I believe that showing compassion would help Snape strengthen his cover, IF he returned to Voldemort (which I don't believe in the first place, actually). I think it would have been smart of him, not foolish. But I suppose pigs start flying sooner than Snape shows a little compassion to Harry. :) The original poster brought this accident as the example of how absurd it will be for Harry to thank Snape after OOP and I tend to agree with it. From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Fri Nov 12 21:02:48 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Fri, 12 Nov 2004 21:02:48 -0000 Subject: Why has DD never suggested Snape thank Harry? (Was: Why has DD never suggest In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117707 > Potioncat: > Well, I don't think Harry needs to thank Snape. snip. > But, even if he did hear enough to know, I wouldn't expect him to > treat Harry any differently than he usually does in these > Harry/Draco squabbles. > > Snape is Snape Alla: Why is it that even if I want to argue, I cannot go in my "arguing" mode with you for long? :o) I suppose you are right, untill something will change their relationship drastically for the better, Snape is going to stay the same. :( But I am glad that we agree on Harry "not thanking Snape" thing. :o) From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com Fri Nov 12 21:14:58 2004 From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (arrowsmithbt) Date: Fri, 12 Nov 2004 21:14:58 -0000 Subject: Bella's Backstory In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117708 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "ericoppen" wrote: > > You know, I'd dearly love to hear Bellatrix Lestrange's story---how > it was that she became what she now is. If it's true that you "have > to mean" the Cruciatus Curse, then what was it that teed her off that > badly? > > I mean---I have serious anger issues myself (as I've said before and > will say again, in Harry's boots I could have Cruciatus'd Bella to a > crackly crunch, no problem) even I would have to work myself up to > it. She seems to be able to Cruciatus people she's never met before > that did nothing to her or to anybody she cares about *cough Neville > cough cough*---so where does she get that apparent bottomless well of > rage? > > It can't be from being tossed into Azkaban, since she was apparently > the DEs' Cruciatus specialist before Godric's Hollow. So---what do > you think got her so furious at the world? *grin* Was Rabastan > _that_ lousy a husband? It's a mystery. You and I - as mere males - are ill equipped to fathom the workings of the female mind. Do you really understand why they explode just because you have the lawn-mower spread all over the kitchen in bits? 'Tis passing strange. There is a theory, the veracity of which I do not care to assert, that postulates that all daughters end up as copies of their mothers. Given who Bella's mother was and what she was like (as evidenced by the portrait in GP) and this theory looks like a runner. The really tricky question so far as I'm concerned is, given that Rastaban must have met the family, including her mother, why the hell did he marry her? Imperio! perhaps? There he is, a modest little DE and Pow! - he's overcome by hormones. Suddenly he no longer notices her collected works of De Sade autographed and bound in Muggle hide, the "Sally Rules OK!" doodles on her school books, the red hour-glass appliqued on the back of her party robe or her habit of announcing "Nobody expects the Spanish Inquisition!" whenever she burst into a room. It's happened to the best of us. We see no further that the soft brown eyes and ....er, one or two other things. But by then it's too late my friend. All in all, Azkaban was probably a welcome relief to him. Kneasy From willsonkmom at msn.com Fri Nov 12 21:26:46 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Fri, 12 Nov 2004 21:26:46 -0000 Subject: Bella's Backstory In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117709 , "ericoppen" wrote: > > > > You know, I'd dearly love to hear Bellatrix Lestrange's story--- how > > it was that she became what she now is. If it's true that you "have > > to mean" the Cruciatus Curse, then what was it that teed her off that > > badly? Kneasy wrote: > It's a mystery. > snip. > > There is a theory, the veracity of which I do not care to assert, that > postulates that all daughters end up as copies of their mothers. > Given who Bella's mother was and what she was like (as evidenced > by the portrait in GP) and this theory looks like a runner. Potioncat: Somehow I knew that Kneasy would be the first to answer this post! I may be mistaken, and if I am you'd better not mention it, but isn't that portrait Sirius' mother? Mrs. Black and Bellatrix's mother could be very very different. In fact, wouldn't it be the two Black fathers who are related (Sirius' father and Bellatrix's father?) Potioncat (who is actually becoming more like her mother-in-law) From willsonkmom at msn.com Fri Nov 12 21:40:02 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Fri, 12 Nov 2004 21:40:02 -0000 Subject: Why has DD never suggested Snape thank Harry? (Was: Why has DD never suggest In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117710 > > Alla: > > I suppose you are right, untill something will change their > relationship drastically for the better, Snape is going to stay the > same. :( > Potioncat: I will go so far as to say, even if something does change their relationship drastically, Snape will stay the same. From carolynwhite2 at aol.com Fri Nov 12 22:12:20 2004 From: carolynwhite2 at aol.com (carolynwhite2) Date: Fri, 12 Nov 2004 22:12:20 -0000 Subject: Bella's Backstory In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117711 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "potioncat" wrote: > > , "ericoppen" wrote: > > > > > > You know, I'd dearly love to hear Bellatrix Lestrange's story--- > how > > > it was that she became what she now is. If it's true that > you "have > > > to mean" the Cruciatus Curse, then what was it that teed her off > that > > > badly? > > Kneasy wrote: > > It's a mystery. > > > snip. > > > > There is a theory, the veracity of which I do not care to assert, > that > > postulates that all daughters end up as copies of their mothers. > > Given who Bella's mother was and what she was like (as evidenced > > by the portrait in GP) and this theory looks like a runner. > > Potioncat: > Somehow I knew that Kneasy would be the first to answer this post! > > I may be mistaken, and if I am you'd better not mention it, but > isn't that portrait Sirius' mother? Mrs. Black and Bellatrix's > mother could be very very different. In fact, wouldn't it be the > two Black fathers who are related (Sirius' father and Bellatrix's > father?) > > Potioncat (who is actually becoming more like her mother-in-law) Carolyn: I have just read an extremely entertaining old post which ends up commenting 'if you are afraid of Dementors, you haven't met their mothers'. Alas, women...always men's worst nightmares. From iris_ft at yahoo.fr Fri Nov 12 22:35:08 2004 From: iris_ft at yahoo.fr (iris_ft) Date: Fri, 12 Nov 2004 22:35:08 -0000 Subject: Inside Harry's mind In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117712 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" wrote: > I think Harry was born with powers similar to those of his parents, > who were talented and fairly powerful wizards but nowhere near as > powerful as Tom Riddle (putting the memory of yourself into a diary so > that you can possess the person who confides in it is no mean feat). > But the bit of Voldie that entered his mind gave him additional powers > that he was not born with, powers which, when fully developed, will > make him Voldie's equal. > > IMO, the venomous anger he's been feeling in OoP, but not in the > earlier books, is something new and different, a strengthening of the > bond created by the scar and/or the deliberate manipulation of Harry's > emotions by Voldemort. It's not part of Voldie that has always been in > him. And the traits that might have placed him in Slytherin had he not > protested, presumably the "thirst to prove himself," could as easily > be an inheritance from show off James, who liked to be admired, as the > more obviously ambitious Voldemort. At any rate, there's no mention of > cunning or an attraction to the Dark Arts, presumably the traits that > made the hat instantly scream "Slytherin!" when it touched Draco > Malfoy's head. > One question comes to my mind after reading this thread, and more especially what you write, Carol : what if ? the bit of Voldemort ? inside Harry was there BEFORE what happened in Godric's Hollow ? After all, maybe some of Voldemort's powers were left in Harry because there was already in the boy something special, making him particularly receptive to them. Something like a "compost" or an "atavism"; I don't know. I don't like precisely that idea, and moreover it is not already very clear, I need to consider it better; but I wonder if Harry wasn't "partly Voldemort" even before the Dark Lord tried to kill him. Just a supposition, probably completely out of topic, Amicalement, Iris From gbannister10 at aol.com Fri Nov 12 22:59:08 2004 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Fri, 12 Nov 2004 22:59:08 -0000 Subject: Why has DD never suggested Snape thank Harry? (Was: Why has DD never suggest In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117713 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "potioncat" wrote: > Potioncat: > We've touched on McGonagall a bit in this thread. Had she been the > one to walk in on the scene, and had she been given the same answer > Snape was, IMHO, Harry would have gotten a tongue lashing as well as > losing points. Geoff: Despite the fact that JKR uses the word "fiercely" in describing Harry's response, I read him as saying it rather archly to Snape - a bit tongue-in-cheek - and I think that McGonagall picked up on that in the incident. after all, he had just been threatened by the son of a Death Eater. Geoff http://www.aspectsofexmoor.com From aletamay01 at yahoo.com Fri Nov 12 23:03:26 2004 From: aletamay01 at yahoo.com (hogsheadbarmaid) Date: Fri, 12 Nov 2004 23:03:26 -0000 Subject: =?iso-8859-1?q?Re:_JKR=92s_giant_mistake=3F?= In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117714 > > > Pippin : > > I think it's significant in itself > > that we yearn to have some simple means of sorting the sheep > > from the lambs, even though the characters who lived through > > the first Voldemort war tell us there was no such method. They > > couldn't tell who to trust, even among their closest friends. > > > > Neri: > Saying the name "Voldemort" doesn't sort the sheep from the lambs, > but it does seem to sort the lions from all the rest (and > disregarding the obvious exceptions of Voldemort himself and whoever > is possessed by him). It couldn't have been used during VWI to tell > friend from foe, since most of the good guys don't dare saying the > name either, and in fact are rather antagonized by those who do. > > Neri barmaid now: First of all kudos to Neri for that well researched, well written original post on this topic! Thorough and thought provoking. I believe you are most likely right that these 5 instances are mistakes, pure and simple. I also agree that saying the name does not separate the "good guys" from the "bad guys" but rather the brave from those who are less so. JKR seems far too interested in complicating notions of "good" and "bad" to make it that easy for us, or Harry, to tell them apart. Given that, I could be convinced that Crouch Sr. would use the V word. Especially in the pensive scene when he is wielding such power over LV's followers. He has reason to feel brave even if he has become a bit overreaching. Of course, as Neri points out so well, it is the inconsistency that makes this problematic. The question of using knowledge of who speaks the name as a way to know friend from foe in the first war raises another question for me. I agree that this is unlikely and does not fit with my ideas about who speaks the name. BUT it raises a related question. At what point did people stop saying the name? And why? It is hard to imagine that it was never commonly spoken. It is certainly commonly known. Hum? --barmaid From Lynx412 at AOL.com Fri Nov 12 23:07:47 2004 From: Lynx412 at AOL.com (Lynx412 at AOL.com) Date: Fri, 12 Nov 2004 18:07:47 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Bella's Backstory Message-ID: <12f.50040b2c.2ec69c43@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 117715 In a message dated 11/12/2004 4:33:05 PM Eastern Standard Time, willsonkmom at msn.com writes: > I may be mistaken, and if I am you'd better not mention it, but > isn't that portrait Sirius' mother? Mrs. Black and Bellatrix's > mother could be very very different. In fact, wouldn't it be the > two Black fathers who are related (Sirius' father and Bellatrix's > father?) I think you're right, but I had thought. What if both Black brothers married sisters? given the apparent drive for 'purity of blood' and the shortage of same, it seems likely that the pool of availability might be rather small. The Other Cheryl [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From foxmoth at qnet.com Sat Nov 13 01:18:00 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Sat, 13 Nov 2004 01:18:00 -0000 Subject: =?iso-8859-1?q?Re:_JKR=92s_giant_mistake=3F?= In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117716 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "nkafkafi" wrote: > > > Pippin : > > I think it's a reader superstition that bad guys can't say > > "Voldemort", very carefully planted by JKR herself. > > > > Neri: > If JKR carefully planted a false notion in us, then I believe the technical term for it is "red herring" and not "reader superstition".< Pippin: "Red herring" refers to the misleading clue itself. A mistaken belief based on false evidence or faulty reasoning is generally referred to as a superstition. Neri: > Of course, almost any clue in the books might be a red herring, > including suspicions pointing to Lupin ;-). Agreed! > > There isn't in fact any canon that the bad guys CAN'T say the name, only that they, like many of the good guys, rather won't. Pippin: Exactly. > > Pippin : > > It isn't the only inaccurate > > recollection in the chapter, since we're told Harry "honestly" > said > > he didn't think of Voldemort before he thought of the dementors. > > To me, as a puzzle hound, that's a clue, though I suppose they could both be oversights.<< > > Neri: > I don't think they are both oversights. I think they are both > examples of reasonable writing style. Harry doesn't say "honestly" that he didn't think of Voldemort BEFORE he thought of the dementors.> He says honestly that he didn't think about Voldemort BUT about the dementors, and the fact that he did consider Voldemort for a very short time isn't relevant,< Pippin: It *is* relevant if Lupin is a legilimens, and there is other evidence of that. If you are arguing now that use of the name Voldemort is an indication of how brave a character is feeling at the moment, I think that is very plausible. But in that case, none of the uses of the name need to be mistakes. Crouch was certainly brave to preside over the trials, knowing that the DE's might eventually retaliate, and indeed they did. Wormtail might have forgotten his fear for a moment in his desperation to accuse Black. Quirrell uses the name with confidence when he is thinking of himself as Voldemort's inseparable ally, but reverts to "my master" when he is relating how hard he finds it to serve. Crouch Jr is brave also, taking great risks on behalf of his master. In that case, the use or non-use of the name indicates nothing about the loyalties of the speaker. Pippin From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Sat Nov 13 02:19:53 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Sat, 13 Nov 2004 02:19:53 -0000 Subject: Why has DD never suggested Snape thank Harry? (Was: Why has DD never suggest In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117717 > Potioncat: > I will go so far as to say, even if something does change their > relationship drastically, Snape will stay the same. Alla: Oh, I hope not. You know my POV on that I am sure :o) I don't want nicey-nice Snape at the end, but I want Snape who will see and respect Harry as Harry, not James. I want Snape who does not stop being sarcastic, but sure stops being sadistic, etc., etc., etc. Since we all know that Snape lives to make me happy, maybe he'll fulfill that dream of mine at end of the series. :o) From meriaugust at yahoo.com Sat Nov 13 02:52:12 2004 From: meriaugust at yahoo.com (meriaugust) Date: Sat, 13 Nov 2004 02:52:12 -0000 Subject: Saying Voldemort's Name (Re: Quirrel) In-Reply-To: <20041112065822.17461.qmail@web41207.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117718 > khinterberg said: > > It has always bothered me that in the last chapter of > PS/SS Quirrell says Voldemort's name. > > > Why, when Death Eaters won't even say his name, can a > young professor with Vapormort on the back of his head > say it without any sign of fear whatsoever?< Flop added: > I really think you put your finger on it there. > Vapormort was on the back of his head. He was > POSSESSED by Vapormort! Although he was able to keep > some of his own personality so that others wouldn't > suspect, I really think that this was, in effect, > Voldemort saying his OWN name. > Meri now: Maybe we are making too big a deal about the name thing. (And lets be honest with each other, we've done it before. Remember the Mark Evans incident?) We have no canon evidence that there is anything more than personal choice and preference behind whether or not a witch or wizard calls Voldemort by that term, the Dark Lord, He Who Must Not Be Named, or You Know Who. DD even still calls him "Tom"! We know from CoS that Tom Riddle was already using the name Voldemort at school (though where he got the idea to be a Lord I don't know). Perhaps it started out as a way for the nascent DEs to idenitfy themselves and their leader. And maybe LV does forbid some of his followers to speak his name and demands they use the more reverential Dark Lord term. But I don't think that we can look at the ways people address LV as a flaw in JKR's storytelling. IMHO these are just the personal choices of the character. For instance, Barty Crouch Jr. and Prof. Quirell, two brash young men who have dedicated themselves fanatically to LV's cause, more loyal than any other DE, willing to make great sacrifices for their master. These two may very well have considered themselves "worthy" to call LV by his proper name. DD, who doesn't fear the use of a name. Harry, who has faced LV multiple times. Lupin and Sirius, two members of the Order who have dedicated their lives to ending LV and refuse to live in fear. In fact the only three examples I can think of of a wizard using LV's name that is a bit out of character would be Hermione (just because she has done all she can to fit into the WW since day one, though it took guts for her to use it) and Peter Pettigrew (which may either indicate that there is more to him than meets the eye, or that he is higher up in the DE order than we know) When is comes to Snape who, whatever I may think of his character, strikes me as an incredibly brave man, uses the term Dark Lord, all I can think of is that he wants to keep his cover. It might just be a little too obvious if someone who might be in league with DD was caught using LV's proper name. If only to reaffirm my point, just look at all the ways people in the original Star Wars trilogy refer to Darth Vader: Vader, the Dark Lord of the Sith, Lord Vader, Darth, my friend, my servant, etc. And these are all differnt characters: Luke, Leia, Obi-Wan, the Emperor, random Imperial underlings. It is probably just a personal preference. Meri - hoping her ramblings make sense! From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Sat Nov 13 02:53:12 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Sat, 13 Nov 2004 02:53:12 -0000 Subject: Bad guys and black hats (was Re: Unreliable narrator) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117719 > Renee: > Then this is where we must agree to disagree. IMO a (contemporary) > literary text should basically speak for itself - barring > explanations to readers from a different cultural environment, > perhaps. If authors need to explain what they're trying to convey, > there's something not quite right. It's a form of telling, instead > of showing. > Alla: I meant to clarify it right away, but somehow forgot, sorry. I just wanted to say that I value author's intention, when character's motivations could be interpreted in several different ways. In that situation, when I am kind of confused, I guess and I have to choose the interpretation, I will go with author's intention as I understand it. Take Snape, for example. :o) She says that he is sadistic teacher and not that I had many doubts about that quality of his, but I still thought that maybe he plays at least a little bit. When I hear such quote from the author's mouth, I am fully convinced. Again, not that text did not speak for itself, but it kinda help me eliminate my doubts. I am afraid I am not making much sense. Take the situation with Voldemort, for example. I have quite clear opinion of him and no matter how many times Rowling says that her bad guys are not conventional black hats, it won't help her case in mind, unless indeed she will show it to me in the story. So, I don't think we are that much in the disagreement. From zacksmom3 at bellsouth.net Fri Nov 12 14:52:35 2004 From: zacksmom3 at bellsouth.net (glavgirl) Date: Fri, 12 Nov 2004 14:52:35 -0000 Subject: Consider the source was Re: A few random puzzles In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117720 Potioncat: > > Whether or not the memory we saw was Little Severus and his parents, or Young Family Man Severus, I think you are on to something. I'm sure there was a family that was destroyed by the Dark Lord himself. Kneasy > Good bet, I think. There's even rumours that the child may not be the only fruit to spring from Snape's loins, that there may be more. > Wouldn't know anything about that, would you? Glavgirl now: Let's say Snape had kids (why, who knows!), maybe his "wife" found out he was supporting Voldy and doing his bidding. Maybe she and the kid(s) left Snape. Maybe that's what caused him to go from serving Voldy to serving the Order. And here is another possiblity, maybe Snape and Harry are related??? Could explain why Snape loathes Harry so much. Well, other than the fact that James and Sirius made his life miserable at Hogwarts. This could be another piece of the puzzle. Snape always seems to be there somewhere when Harry is in trouble. From kgpopp at yahoo.com Fri Nov 12 16:06:36 2004 From: kgpopp at yahoo.com (kgpopp) Date: Fri, 12 Nov 2004 16:06:36 -0000 Subject: Occlumency: Relax or resist? Does Snape really favor Draco? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117721 Kathryn: > > > Snape might not be a nice person, but he is the only > character who is perfect for this kind of training. << Lupinlore: > > And yet, Dumbledore says, "It was a mistake not to teach you > > myself." I'm inclined to take Dumbledore at his word, that he > would have taught Harry himself had he not feared for Harry's > safety, and that he feels Snape was the second best choice.... > Hopefully when the next book comes out Harry will have a > different Occlumency teacher and we can see if Snape's method > is universal or idiosyncratic to him.< Pippin: > I think we've established that there are different educational > philosophies and that Snape's method is used and accepted in > the Real World, though some find it abhorrent and question its > effectiveness. That being the case, the question for me is not > whether this is idiosyncratic to Snape, because apparently it > isn't. The question is whether he chose this method regardless > of its chances of success because it would give him an excuse > to attack Harry, or because it is the one he knows best and uses > most effectively. > > We'd have to see him teaching occlumency to someone else to > know that -- Draco, perhaps? Pippin's question or suggestion to compare how Snape would teach Draco vs Harry got me thinking .. does Snape really favor Draco? I'm of 2 minds on this. Part of me thinks it could be an act. We know Snape is capable of hiding his feelings and since he has renounced the dark arts it seems odd that he'd really like Draco. I mean Draco makes not bones about his dislike of muggles, and muggle borns. Draco is also a bully and show-off which is what Snape disliked about James. Plus Snape knows Malfoys have bought into the pure-blood nonsense, and that LM was a death eater. So perhaps the favoritism is an act. Or maybe a way to stay in LM's good graces for when VD returns. On the other hand one of the big themes in Harry Potter is to judge an individual for their own actions and not by those of their family. So perhaps Dumbledore's philosophy has rubbed off on Snape. Perhaps Snape see's some of himself in Draco. Both come from family's that seem to have a bully for a father. I'm making a little bit of a leap here, but it also seems both familys dislike muggles and muggle borns. So maybe Snape hopes to be a role model for Draco. You known, steer him away from the death eaters, teach him to respect knowledge, to not be confined by your families expectations. Kristen From ophelia_de_la_nuit at hotmail.com Fri Nov 12 16:37:38 2004 From: ophelia_de_la_nuit at hotmail.com (ophelia_de_la_nuit at hotmail.com) Date: Fri, 12 Nov 2004 16:37:38 -0000 Subject: Kreacher's bandages In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117722 > KMC: How does Kreacher know when to injure BB? There must have been some system in place to let him know. If [Sirius] knew [the mirror] was gone, he may think Harry'd already tried that method and resorted to the floo network when the mirror didn't work. > Carol responds: > I don't think he's using a mirror. I think there are only two, Sirius's and James's, which Harry now has, and that Sirius has his (but is keeping the fact that he gave James's to Harry a scret from Lupin--sorry--wrong thread.) Kabuki: This is my first post so do bear with me. I too doubt that Kreacher is using the mirror, but not just because it may have been broken or whatnot. Isn't it more likely that he was using the floo network when the house was near deserted and Sirius was upstairs moping with BB? Doesn't he does live beneath an old- fashioned pot belly stove in the cellar? Couldn't that work as a makeshift floo? Sorry but I'm at work and without access to direct quotes. And is there any evidence that Lupin even knows about the mirror? Sirius was being watched for any strange activity. He was pretty much under magical house arrest. The mirror seems to be some simple brand of magic, and it is probably easy to counter with the right charms. > Carol: > I also doubt very much that Kreacher has a Dark Mark. He's a House Elf, a slave, a lesser being in the eyes of Voldemort. He's communicating somehow with Narcissa (and directly or indirectly with Lucius), but how he's doing it (after the escape and return at Christmastime) is completely unclear. Kabuki: It doesn't seem like he would have had to do much in the way of playing double agent. The wizards tend to ignore or avoid him, from what I could see. Its a Marxist uprising waiting to happen, if given the right incentive and circumstance IMO. Just my two cents... From eggplant9998 at yahoo.com Fri Nov 12 17:59:14 2004 From: eggplant9998 at yahoo.com (eggplant9998) Date: Fri, 12 Nov 2004 17:59:14 -0000 Subject: Why has DD never suggested Snape thank Harry? (Was: Why has DD never suggest In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117723 "justcarol67" wrote: > Harry is fully recovered; it's been at > least three days since the MoM, and > Harry *is* misbehaving. I very much doubt Harry will ever fully recover from the traumatic events in OoP, and he was NOT misbehaving, he was just defending himself. From the book: "Malfoy glanced around -Harry knew he was checking for signs of teachers -then he looked back at Harry and said in a low voice, 'You're dead, Potter.' [ ] 'You're going to pay,' said Malloy in a voice barely louder than a whisper. 'I'm going to make you pay for what you've done to my father '" Then Harry said Malfoy's father was a scumbag, a perfectly true statement, the man is a scumbag. Back to the book: "Malfoy's hand flew towards his wand, but Harry was too quick for him; he had drawn his own wand before Malfoy's fingers had even entered the pocket of his robes." And that's when Snape showed up, talking to Harry as "coldly as ever" and with "a sneering smile" removed 10 points from Gryffindor. Snape and Malfoy junior both figured that Harry had not suffered enough in the last few days, and that's why there were 2 scumbag in the room that day. Eggplant From snow15145 at yahoo.com Sat Nov 13 03:53:26 2004 From: snow15145 at yahoo.com (snow15145) Date: Sat, 13 Nov 2004 03:53:26 -0000 Subject: =?iso-8859-1?q?Re:_JKR=92s_giant_mistake=3F?= In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117724 Neri and Pippin snipped: > > Neri: > > I don't think they are both oversights. I think they are both > > examples of reasonable writing style. Harry doesn't say > "honestly" that he didn't think of Voldemort BEFORE he thought > of the dementors.> He says honestly that he didn't think about > Voldemort BUT about the dementors, and the fact that he did > consider Voldemort for a very short time isn't relevant,< > > Pippin: > It *is* relevant if Lupin is a legilimens, and there is other > evidence of that. > > If you are arguing now that use of the name Voldemort is an > indication of how brave a character is feeling at the moment, > I think that is very plausible. But in that case, none of the uses of > the name need to be mistakes. > > Crouch was certainly brave to preside over the trials, knowing > that the DE's might eventually retaliate, and indeed they did. > Wormtail might have forgotten his fear for a moment in his > desperation to accuse Black. Quirrell uses the name with > confidence when he is thinking of himself as Voldemort's > inseparable ally, but reverts to "my master" when he is relating > how hard he finds it to serve. Crouch Jr is brave also, taking > great risks on behalf of his master. > > In that case, the use or non-use of the name indicates nothing > about the loyalties of the speaker. Snow intrigued by Pippin's last response: I'm not sure that this is what you meant but this is how I perceived what you said: As long as a deatheater is being faithful to Voldy, no ill thoughts at the time, that person is capable of saying Voldemort by name but if that deatheater is being knowingly unfaithful betraying, then that deatheater fears the name being said or saying it. This reminds me of Hermione's galleon that Harry accused her of imposing the same sort of spell on as the dark mark but more so the binding contract that was signed by all of Dumbledore's Army unknowingly to them. Was Voldy's contract with his deatheaters, when they received the dark mark, somewhat similar? If the deatheater was not faithful they could not say his name without being known to Voldy as a betrayer? We don't know the origin of why all people fear to say Voldy's name or why Tom Riddle perceived it to be so (The name people would one day fear to speak) but if it began with the betrayal and defiance of a deatheater who had just said the name Voldemort and was struck down I'm sure that `word' would have been passed around. Imagine the townspeople talking "The moment Regulus said the name of Voldemort, he was struck down without notice" "It must be the name Voldemort, don't say it, pass it on " I use Regulus as an example because Sirius announced to Harry that his brother tried to back out and there is no turning in resignation to Voldemort. So if you are not a deatheater no dark mark, no contract, no problem...if you are a deatheater or had been, by way of the mark, don't say it (Voldy's name) unless you are very skilled in Occlumency or not betraying the master Voldemort. Snow From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Sat Nov 13 04:04:39 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Sat, 13 Nov 2004 04:04:39 -0000 Subject: Why has DD never suggested Snape thank Harry? (Was: Why has DD never suggest In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117725 Eggplant: > I very much doubt Harry will ever fully recover from the traumatic > events in OoP, and he was NOT misbehaving, he was just defending > himself. From the book: > > "Malfoy glanced around -Harry knew he was checking for > signs of teachers -then he looked back at Harry and said in a > low voice, 'You're dead, Potter.' [ ] 'You're going to pay,' said > Malloy in a voice barely louder than a whisper. 'I'm going to make > you pay for what you've done to my father '" > > Then Harry said Malfoy's father was a scumbag, a perfectly true > statement, the man is a scumbag. Back to the book: > > "Malfoy's hand flew towards his wand, but Harry was too quick > for him; he had drawn his own wand before Malfoy's fingers had even > entered the pocket of his robes." > > And that's when Snape showed up, talking to Harry as "coldly as > ever" and with "a sneering smile" removed 10 points from > Gryffindor. Snape and Malfoy junior both figured that Harry had not > suffered enough in the last few days, and that's why there were 2 > scumbag in the room that day. > Alla: Bravo, Eggplant. I completely agree with you that Harry was defending himself - I just reread this scene and read it exactly the same way. So, no I don't think that Snape was administering routine discipline at all. He was being himself. The only possible mitigating circumstance which I may see for Snape is that we don't know when exactly he emerged from stairs. Did he see that Malfoy started the confrontation or not? If he saw it, I am adding this event to my "Let's slap Snape" list of moments. From skater314159 at yahoo.co.uk Fri Nov 12 23:08:58 2004 From: skater314159 at yahoo.co.uk (Megan) Date: Fri, 12 Nov 2004 23:08:58 -0000 Subject: Brain room In-Reply-To: <20041112064953.85277.qmail@web41214.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117726 Flop: > Just a trippy sort of thought that's been bouncing > around in my brain: What if they never WERE somebody's > brains? I'm toying with this wild concept of the MoM > developing sort of "free-standing" brains kind of as a > data-storage thing like Wizard computer > hard-drives?... Okay, that's wilder than it sounded > before I typed it out. Any thoughts?... "Megan" replies: I agree... I was thinking along the lines of the Epistemological Philosophy paper by Hilary Putnam "Brains in a Vat"... and all of the lovely epistemological implications that ensue from that... (I mentioned it in my Epistemology class - in Philosophy - and all the other students just stared at me, so I guess they don't know about/haven't read yet book five!) Any thoughts eh? From skater314159 at yahoo.co.uk Fri Nov 12 23:30:55 2004 From: skater314159 at yahoo.co.uk (Megan) Date: Fri, 12 Nov 2004 23:30:55 -0000 Subject: Is Dudley...slow? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117727 "ericoppen" : > I can't remember anything at all in canon that implies that Dudley's > even normally intelligent. He never reads (while reading wasn't as > big a thing for my classmates as it was for me, they all could and > did), his grades are lousy, and he often behaves a lot like a person > a lot younger than his chronological age. "Megan" replies: I think his not reading and making bad grades comes from an intellectual sort of laziness, and not from having biological, psychological or physiological problems that hinders his learning or behaving like a normal person I think Dudley is just a lazy, spoilt rich kid... which is a shame. From crochet_addictnks at earthlink.net Fri Nov 12 23:08:32 2004 From: crochet_addictnks at earthlink.net (Genita) Date: Fri, 12 Nov 2004 23:08:32 -0000 Subject: Is Dudley...slow? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117728 ericoppen wrote: > I've sometimes wondered if a lot of Petunia's attitudes couldn't be > explained by saying that Dudley's...slow of wit. > If she and Vernon knew they had a child with special needs, that > would explain a lot of their resentment of Harry. Here they are, > with the child they had longed for turning out defective, and, to rub > it in, they get their already-unwanted nephew, son of Petunia's much- > resented sister-who-was-the-star-of-the-family, dumped on them, and > he's bright and normal!... > Having a child like the sort I'm referring to is really, really hard > on the parents, and some of them take refuge in proving that denial > isn't just a river in Egypt. I don't think that Dudley is slow or a Special Needs Child. Rather, I think that Vernon and Petunia are all together too lax,and lenient. However, I know what it is to be a special needs child. I was one. Also, it should be said that not ALL Special Needs children possess the nasty, inappropriate, disgusting,shameful attitude and behaviors that Dudley has displayed. If I had dared to behave as Dudley has, I can assure you, my father would've blistered my rear SO hard, it would've been fair to say I wouldn't have been able to sit for a week- literally! ( It would've been seen as shaming him AND the family directly!) Yes, it IS true that in some families, having a Special Needs child- to them is cause of shame, and something to be hidden, and denied. In some cases used as a reason to punish a child needlessly for selfish reasons! I think that Petunia's resentment and bitterness with having to take Harry in stems from her hatred and bigotry- in that she fears anything 'different', 'abnormal', or 'freakish'...- rather- this is MY personal opinion of Petunia- is that she's a hypocrite AND a bigot!- IF her son was a Special Needs Child, it would make common sense to think that the Special Needs thing would make her OWN son these things that she detests and loathes Harry for...Vernon? He's a guilty of the same bigotry, hypocrisy that his wife enjoys indulging in, herself. I also think it needs to be said that not ALL Special Needs Children show the shameful, nasty, repulsive, filthy trashy behaviors that Dudley shows in the novels. Rather, I think that Dudley was taught hatred at home, and no clear cut boundaries were established, nor was there any clear cut consequences for his actions...- I think you're forgetting that being a Special Needs Child is equally as hard on the child, as it is the parent! More so on the child. - that's just my take on it- Vernon and Petunia are doing the kid a grave disservice in their poor,substandard parenting,and teaching him bigotry, hypocrisy,and that bullying IS acceptable behavior- when in fact none of the above are desired qualities or characteristics! Nita From figgys26cats at yahoo.com Sat Nov 13 00:02:49 2004 From: figgys26cats at yahoo.com (Kathleen Hunt) Date: Fri, 12 Nov 2004 16:02:49 -0800 (PST) Subject: DU treatment of Trelawny Message-ID: <20041113000249.21782.qmail@web51702.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 117730 I'm sorry if this has been covered in the past, but I would like to know if any of you have a theory on why Umbridge hated and picked on Trelawny? Trelawny mentioned that Seers have been persecuted for years, but why? Was Trelawny considered part human because of her gift? I would say no, but I don't understand why DU went after her. Please let me know. From emhutch at sbcglobal.net Sat Nov 13 00:24:42 2004 From: emhutch at sbcglobal.net (Elizabeth Morgan) Date: Sat, 13 Nov 2004 00:24:42 -0000 Subject: Is Dudley...slow? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117731 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "ericoppen" wrote: > I've sometimes wondered if a lot of Petunia's attitudes couldn't be explained by saying that Dudley's...slow of wit. (me now (Eilis):I think it's that exactly, and not anything medical.) What I think is now called a "special-needs child", although the PC authorities may have come up with fresh euphemisms. If she and Vernon knew they had a child with special needs, that would explain a lot of their resentment of Harry. Here they are, with the child they had longed for turning out defective, and, to rub it in, they get their already-unwanted nephew, son of Petunia's much-resented sister-who-was-the-star-of-the-family, dumped on them, and he's bright and normal! (I've never thought that they considered Harry normal, really by any means,and I think that they believe the magic out-weighs anything positive about him.) Having a child like the sort I'm referring to is really, really hard on the parents, and some of them take refuge in proving that denial isn't just a river in Egypt. They'll insist long and loud that their precious child is _normal,_ and don't you dare forget it, Mister! If anything, they're even more protective of their children than ordinary parents...and doesn't _that_ sound familiar?I can't remember anything at all in canon that implies that Dudley's even normally intelligent. He never reads (while reading wasn't as big a thing for my classmates as it was for me, they all could and did), his grades are lousy, and he often behaves a lot like a person a lot younger than his chronological age. (I've always put this down as Dud being spoiled all his life; if you think of normally mature people you think of someone who is reasonably in control of their emotions, and able to accept that life dosn't revolve around them, then you're really describing someone who's been raised with a sense of disipline (sp?), and at least SOME limits on what is allowed. a.k.a. not Dudley.) True, he got into Smeltings---but not being familiar with that sort of pseudo-public-school, I don't know whether or how much Vernon was able to pull strings to get him in. About the only school system I'm personally familiar with is the US public system. (as am I, so I can't comment on that) About the only thing in canon that militates against my theory is that Dudley, unlike _most_ mentally-slow children, has a nasty disposition. However, that doesn't mean anything in and of itself; _most_ such people are gentle and sweet, but that doesn't preclude individual variance. Comments? *donning Howlerproof armour* (if someone knowledgable about British public schools 1990-1997 wants to chip in, PLEASE do, Eilis, who really does need to finish 'Tom Browns Schooldays' soon) From bob.oliver at cox.net Fri Nov 12 22:09:32 2004 From: bob.oliver at cox.net (lupinlore) Date: Fri, 12 Nov 2004 22:09:32 -0000 Subject: Occlumency: Relax or resist? (Was: CHAPTER DISCUSSION: Chapter 29, Career Ad In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117732 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" wrote: > > > If we could eliminate the concept of martial-arts based relaxation, it > would help to eliminate a great deal of confusion. No analogies, > please; Why not? After all, argument from analogy is often insightful and quite useful. I grant you it has its flaws, but so do all argument forms. > Again, if you want to persuade me that I'm mistaken, you can't just > snip my arguments and sweep them all away with your own opinion. I think we are talking past each other here, Carol. I'm not trying to persuade anyone that they are mistaken. As I believe Kneasy has observed, if you look at the history of discussion threads on this list, particularly with regard to Snape, almost no one changes their mind about anything (Siriusly Snapey Susan being about the only exception). The only person who ever moves anyone is JKR herself, and I suspect that is the case in this instance. Until she issues as definitive ruling, if she ever does, those of us who believe Snape was a semi-hysterical, hypocritical sadist in Occlumency will not be phased by any number of quotes or argumentation, and the same goes for those who have a more positive view of him. You > have to actually answer them using canon and logic. (Analogies don't > prove anything and are in fact a logical fallacy.) Oh, of course analogies are a valid way of arguing. As I said above, they have their weakness, but so do all argument forms, including those based on quotes, which after all may be taken out of context, misinterpreted, or otherwise misused in any number of ways. So, to answer you in the same vein that you answered me, if you don't find what I said persuasive, I'm not at all surprised, as I wasn't trying to persuade you. If you don't like analogies and prefer quotes, that is of course your right. However, please, and I mean this politely, don't expect everyone on this list to conform to your ideas of what an argument should or should not look like. Lupinlore From TheMuffinMan0311 at comcast.net Fri Nov 12 20:15:04 2004 From: TheMuffinMan0311 at comcast.net (TheMuffinMan0311 at comcast.net) Date: Fri, 12 Nov 2004 20:15:04 +0000 Subject: Harry taking credit for what he didnt do... Message-ID: <111220042015.825.419519C700018E09000003392200737478CECECCCF020E03020700009A030A089B@comcast.net> No: HPFGUIDX 117733 I know this is only a small little thing, but it has always bothered me what Harry said to Draco at the end of Book 5: "'You're going to pay,' said Malfoy in a voice barely louder than a whisper,'I'm going to make you've done to my father...' 'Well, I'm terrified now,' said Harry sarcastically,'I s'pose Lord Voldemort's Just a warm up act for you three...'" The way Harry gloats in front of Draco, He tries to make it seem like HE fought Voldie, when really when faced with the dark lord he froze up and had to be saved by Dumbledore! I've always hated the fact that Harry said this, im not sure why, but ive kind of lost a little respect in Harry after this. SO whats everyone's opinion in this?? "Its Always Darkest Just Before It Gets Pitch Black..." TheMuffinMan From willsonkmom at msn.com Sat Nov 13 04:39:40 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Sat, 13 Nov 2004 04:39:40 -0000 Subject: Why has DD never suggested Snape thank Harry? (Was: Why has DD never suggest In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117734 >>>> Eggplant: > > > > "Malfoy glanced around -Harry knew he was checking for > > signs of teachers -then he looked back at Harry and said in a > > low voice, 'You're dead, Potter.' [ ] 'You're going to pay,' > said > > Malloy in a voice barely louder than a whisper. 'I'm going to >>make you pay for what you've done to my father '" Potioncat: I'm trusting your quotes and not looking for any on my own. To re- state your entry: Draco checks for teachers. Does not see any. >>>Eggplant > > "Malfoy's hand flew towards his wand, but Harry was too quick > > for him; he had drawn his own wand before Malfoy's fingers had > even entered the pocket of his robes." > > > > And that's when Snape showed up, talking to Harry as "coldly as > > ever" and with "a sneering smile" removed 10 points from > > Gryffindor. Potioncat: To requote "he had drawn his own wand before Malfoy's fingers had even entered the pocket of his robes." Snape shows up to see Harry pointing a wand at Draco who does not even have his hand in his pocket. (This is vintage TV mystery set up, innocent person picks up murder weapon and leans over body just as the police come in) Eggplant: >Snape and Malfoy junior both figured that Harry had > not suffered enough in the last few days, and that's why there >were 2scumbag in the room that day. Potioncat: McGonagall "assumed" that Harry had tricked Draco into wandering around the castle at night by telling a wild story about a dragon. McGonagall jumped all over Harry and the Weasley twin (Fred or George) for "attacking" Draco after he really insulted their mothers at the Quidditch game. Snape isn't the only one who takes Draco's side but no one ever complains about Minnie. >>> Alla: > > Bravo, Eggplant. I completely agree with you that Harry was > defending himself - I just reread this scene and read it exactly the same way. > > So, no I don't think that Snape was administering routine discipline at all. He was being himself. > > The only possible mitigating circumstance which I may see for >Snape is that we don't know when exactly he emerged from stairs. > > Did he see that Malfoy started the confrontation or not? If he saw > it, I am adding this event to my "Let's slap Snape" list of >moments. Potioncat: Let's face it. Even if Gryffindor had had 10 points by that time, taking them was not going to matter. So what? So either Snape sees what looks like Harry picking on Malfoy and takes points in what would be fair punishment(but meaningless) or he saw it was Malfoy's fault and administers unfair (but meaningless) punishment. Oh, Alla, Snape lives to make you happy and you slap him! Oh, wait, he was a friend of Bella's....I'd better not ask. ;-) From coriolan at worldnet.att.net Sat Nov 13 01:38:14 2004 From: coriolan at worldnet.att.net (coriolan_cmc) Date: Sat, 13 Nov 2004 01:38:14 -0000 Subject: Waiting for Godot In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117735 > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "potioncat" > wrote: > > I was checking over at the Lexicon to find out when each of the > > HP books was first published. I found that Chamber of Secrets > > and Prisoner of Azkaban both came out in 1999. Samuel Beckett's Waiting for Godot was copyright 1952, just a year after two 1951 novels, Molloy and Malone Dies. If the great Absurdist could multi-task, why not JKR? - CMC (a long-time Beckett fan) From easimm at yahoo.com Fri Nov 12 23:19:59 2004 From: easimm at yahoo.com (curlyhornedsnorkack) Date: Fri, 12 Nov 2004 23:19:59 -0000 Subject: Humour: Why Harry probably shoudn't have kids Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117736 There's probably a good reason that Book 7 will have to be the last one. I can imagine Harry scolding his complaining children: "What do you mean, 'My room is too small'? When I was your age, I didn't even have a room. I had to to sleep in the cupboard!" "What do you mean, 'There might be spiders in there'? When I was your age, spiders were my pets!" "What do you mean, 'But that bully's too big for me to take on'? When I was your age, I tackled a troll and poked my wand up its nose!" And so on! I think the first one's pretty good. I hope others can come up with better ones. PS: This is my first post, ever. "curlyhornedsnorkack" From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Sat Nov 13 04:49:14 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Sat, 13 Nov 2004 04:49:14 -0000 Subject: Harry taking credit for what he didnt do... In-Reply-To: <111220042015.825.419519C700018E09000003392200737478CECECCCF020E03020700009A030A089B@comcast.net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117737 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, TheMuffinMan0311 at c... wrote: snip. > The way Harry gloats in front of Draco, He tries to make it seem like HE fought Voldie, when really when faced with the dark lord he froze up and had to be saved by Dumbledore! I've always hated the fact that Harry said this, im not sure why, but ive kind of lost a little respect in Harry after this. SO whats everyone's opinion in this?? > Alla: Huh? Could you explain please "had to be saved by Dumbledore"/ Sure, Harry is not ready to completely win over Voldie yet, but he saved himself when Voldemort possesed him. "It is the powerheld within that room that you possess in such quantities and which Voldemort has not at all. The power took you to save Sirius tonight. That power also saved you from possession by Voldemort, because he could not bear to reside ina body so full of the force he detest. In the end, it mattered not that you could nto close your mind. It was your heart that saved you" - OOP, paperback, p.844. Harry screwed up enough that night, but he did not take credit for what he did not do. From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Sat Nov 13 04:53:39 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Sat, 13 Nov 2004 04:53:39 -0000 Subject: Why has DD never suggested Snape thank Harry? (Was: Why has DD never suggest In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117738 > Potioncat: > McGonagall "assumed" that Harry had tricked Draco into wandering > around the castle at night by telling a wild story about a dragon. > > McGonagall jumped all over Harry and the Weasley twin (Fred or > George) for "attacking" Draco after he really insulted their mothers > at the Quidditch game. > > Snape isn't the only one who takes Draco's side but no one ever > complains about Minnie. > Alla: Oy, I expected better from you. :o) McGonagall taking Draco's side is called being "fair" in my book. Why would I complain about that? Now, the exact analogy for Snape's behaviour would be.... that is right him taking Harry's side. When would we see that? > Potioncat: > Let's face it. Even if Gryffindor had had 10 points by that time, > taking them was not going to matter. So what? > > So either Snape sees what looks like Harry picking on Malfoy and > takes points in what would be fair punishment(but meaningless) or he > saw it was Malfoy's fault and administers unfair (but meaningless) > punishment. Alla: But that is the whole point, right? If Snape saw that it was malfoy's fault - then there was absolutely NO NEED to do anything. he could at least IGNORE the accident and show that he has some humanity left in him. Potioncat: > Oh, Alla, Snape lives to make you happy and you slap him! > Oh, wait, he was a friend of Bella's....I'd better not ask. ;-) Alla: LOLOL! (Humming Happy Birthday) From snow15145 at yahoo.com Sat Nov 13 05:11:07 2004 From: snow15145 at yahoo.com (snow15145) Date: Sat, 13 Nov 2004 05:11:07 -0000 Subject: Harry taking credit for what he didnt do... In-Reply-To: <111220042015.825.419519C700018E09000003392200737478CECECCCF020E03020700009A030A089B@comcast.net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117739 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, TheMuffinMan0311 at c... wrote: > > I know this is only a small little thing, but it has always bothered me what Harry said to Draco at the end of Book 5: > > "'You're going to pay,' said Malfoy in a voice barely louder than a whisper,'I'm going to make you've done to my father...' > > 'Well, I'm terrified now,' said Harry sarcastically,'I s'pose Lord Voldemort's Just a warm up act for you three...'" > > The way Harry gloats in front of Draco, He tries to make it seem like HE fought Voldie, when really when faced with the dark lord he froze up and had to be saved by Dumbledore! I've always hated the fact that Harry said this, im not sure why, but ive kind of lost a little respect in Harry after this. SO whats everyone's opinion in this?? > > "Its Always Darkest Just Before It Gets Pitch Black..." > > TheMuffinMan Snow: No offence to you muffinman but you quoted and questioned my very favorite passage! First off Dumbledore couldn't have saved Harry at the Ministry at the time of the possession if he wanted to! Harry has faced Voldemort face-to-face and heart-to-sub-human heart at the Ministry and yes `Harry' won. Dumbledore interceded but when it came down to it it was Harry and his heart that saved Harry. This particular confrontation wrapped it all up for me. Harry, the one who has faced more in his life than most people have had a right to face, being confronted by a boisterous child who is a product of the evil that has caused him such pain, Yes! Harry has all the right to treat this child as the ignorant personification of a person that he is. Harry tired and weary of the battle, confronted by the wimp son of Lucius whom has always helped in the destruction of his own demise, faced with this obnoxious adversary, I would expect nothing less than the statement he had offered. Snow From jlnbtr at yahoo.com Sat Nov 13 04:47:45 2004 From: jlnbtr at yahoo.com (Juli) Date: Fri, 12 Nov 2004 20:47:45 -0800 (PST) Subject: DU treatment of Trelawney In-Reply-To: <20041113000249.21782.qmail@web51702.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041113044745.2682.qmail@web53101.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 117740 --- Kathleen Hunt wrote: > I'm sorry if this has been covered in the past, but > I would like to know if any of you have a theory on > why Umbridge hated and picked on Trelawney? Trelawney > mentioned that Seers have been persecuted for years, > but why? Was Trelawney considered part human because > of her gift? I would say no, but I don't understand > why DU went after her. Please let me know. Juli: I think the reason DU picked on Trelawney was that she's a bad teacher, I mean she can't see the future even if her life depended on it, sure she's made 2 real prophecies, but I doubt DU knew anything about them. Juli From willsonkmom at msn.com Sat Nov 13 05:21:57 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Sat, 13 Nov 2004 05:21:57 -0000 Subject: Why has DD never suggested Snape thank Harry? (Was: Why has DD never suggest In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117741 > > Alla: > > Oy, I expected better from you. :o) McGonagall taking Draco's side > is called being "fair" in my book. Why would I complain about that? > Now, the exact analogy for Snape's behaviour would be.... that is > right him taking Harry's side. When would we see that? > Potioncat now: Fair? Really? Except for Umbridge being around, if I werw McGonagall, I would have looked the other way and let Draco get his clock cleaned. (I have no idea what that means.) I am referring to the post Quidditch fight with a Weasley and Harry against Draco. But my point was, it often looks to McGonagall that Harry is the one at fault. And I think it seems that way to Snape too. Are they both seeing Berk!James in Harry. > > snipping Potioncat post > Alla: > > But that is the whole point, right? If Snape saw that it was > malfoy's fault - then there was absolutely NO NEED to do anything. > he could at least IGNORE the accident and show that he has some > humanity left in him. Potioncat: So if Snape saw it was Malfoy's fault he should do nothing? Just say, "Good afternoon boys" and walk on by? I'd really, really like to know what he was going to say before he was interrupted. Was he going to say, "we'll just have to forget it?" or was he going to say, "we'll just have to work in a detention before the train home." I think to some extent, we all expected Snape to be nicer after we learned he was a member of the Order. (Hermione certainly did.) And perhaps we expected something better of him after the battle at the MoM. But Snape just stays his old contrary self. > > Potioncat: > > Oh, Alla, Snape lives to make you happy and you slap him! > > Oh, wait, he was a friend of Bella's....I'd better not ask. ;-) > > Alla: > > LOLOL! (Humming Happy Birthday) Potioncat: Thanks again! From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Sat Nov 13 05:31:45 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Sat, 13 Nov 2004 05:31:45 -0000 Subject: Why has DD never suggested Snape thank Harry? (Was: Why has DD never suggest In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117742 > Potioncat now: snip. > But my point was, it often looks to McGonagall that Harry is the one > at fault. And I think it seems that way to Snape too. Are they both > seeing Berk!James in Harry. Alla: I disagree. I think McGonagall prefers to overpunish the member of her own House, even if she thinks that he may not be that much at fault, rather than look biased. > Potioncat: > So if Snape saw it was Malfoy's fault he should do nothing? Just > say, "Good afternoon boys" and walk on by? > Alla: LOLOL! Oh, no, of course not. I was suggesting it as a compromise. You know, if you (anybody, not just you :o)) will say that Snape cannot, just cannot show compassion to Harry, I was suggesting that he can at least show compassion in a passive way - by ignoring the incident. Of course, I would much prefer him to punish Malfoy , but I realise that I am dreaming of this one). Potioncat: > I think to some extent, we all expected Snape to be nicer after we > learned he was a member of the Order. (Hermione certainly did.) And > perhaps we expected something better of him after the battle at the > MoM. But Snape just stays his old contrary self. > Alla: Again, I did not expect him to be nicer, but after the end of GoF I most definitely expected him to change something in his views about Harry. :o) Very dissapointed I was. I realise though that plot wise it is way too early. From annemehr at yahoo.com Sat Nov 13 05:41:51 2004 From: annemehr at yahoo.com (annemehr) Date: Sat, 13 Nov 2004 05:41:51 -0000 Subject: Harry taking credit for what he didnt do... In-Reply-To: <111220042015.825.419519C700018E09000003392200737478CECECCCF020E03020700009A030A089B@comcast.net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117743 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, TheMuffinMan0311 at c... wrote: > > I know this is only a small little thing, but it has always bothered me what Harry said to Draco at the end of Book 5: > > "'You're going to pay,' said Malfoy in a voice barely louder than a whisper,'I'm going to make you've done to my father...' > > 'Well, I'm terrified now,' said Harry sarcastically,'I s'pose Lord Voldemort's Just a warm up act for you three...'" > > The way Harry gloats in front of Draco, He tries to make it seem like HE fought Voldie, when really when faced with the dark lord he froze up and had to be saved by Dumbledore! I've always hated the fact that Harry said this, im not sure why, but ive kind of lost a little respect in Harry after this. SO whats everyone's opinion in this?? > > "Its Always Darkest Just Before It Gets Pitch Black..." > > TheMuffinMan Annemehr: Besides agreeing with what Alla and Snow have posted, I'd just like to add two points: 1)Harry *had* faced Voldemort wand-to-wand a year before, in the graveyard, and Harry was the one who forced the bead of light into Voldemort's wand. 2)Harry probably realised there was no point in arguing the facts with Draco; all that Harry said was just for the purpose of showing he was not going to be cowed by Draco. This is also the reasoning I use for why Harry didn't bother explaining that it wasn't he who'd landed Lucius in Azkaban (it was Voldemort's plot and Dumbledore's superior fighting skills that did that). Annemehr hoping Harry never stops walking around... From nkafkafi at yahoo.com Sat Nov 13 05:53:03 2004 From: nkafkafi at yahoo.com (nkafkafi) Date: Sat, 13 Nov 2004 05:53:03 -0000 Subject: =?iso-8859-1?q?Re:_JKR=92s_giant_mistake=3F?= In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117744 > Pippin: > "Red herring" refers to the misleading clue itself. A mistaken > belief based on false evidence or faulty reasoning is generally > referred to as a superstition. Neri: Aren't you using slightly too strong words? While there is no absolute proof that the bad guys can't say the name Voldemort, canon does seem to suggest it. >> Neri: > > There isn't in fact any canon that the bad guys CAN'T say the > name, only that they, like many of the good guys, rather won't. > > Pippin: > Exactly. > Neri: I wasn't clear enough here. Lets look at the facts: (1) Five wizards ALWAYS address Voldemort by his name, whether they feel brave or not. These are DD, Harry, Lupin, Sirius and (only since OotP) Hermione. (2) Two other Gryffindors say the name only once or several times with great reluctance, not because they feel brave but when challenged (McGonagall) or because there's no choice (Hagrid). (3) The other good wizards never say the name in canon, and usually seem scared when they hear it. (4) The bad wizards don't say the name (except Voldemort himself and Quirrell when possessed by Voldemort). Furthermore, Wormtail, Snape and the DEs in the DoM flinch very badly or protest strongly when the good guys utter the name "Voldemort" in their presence. Bellatrix is enraged enough to forget that her boss needs the prophecy. Snape actually rubs his dark mark, and claim that only DD is strong enough to say the name (while DD himself thinks everybody should use it. A strange disagreement there). (5) Through all five books I could find only three exceptions to (3) and (4), and as I showed in the originl post, there are some good reasons to think that these exceptions are simply editing mistakes. All this suggests that only wizards with lots of courage can say the name, and that DEs have a real problem with it, which is perhaps connected with their dark mark. As I said we don't have definite proof that they can't say the name at all, but it certainly seems possible. You don't have to believe in this opinion, of course, but it is no more a superstition than the opposite opinion. > Pippin: > If you are arguing now that use of the name Voldemort is an > indication of how brave a character is feeling at the moment, > I think that is very plausible. Neri: No, I'm not arguing that. Canon doesn't seem to support it much. Neri thanks Nora for resurrecting that old post from Yahoomort oblivion. From bob.oliver at cox.net Sat Nov 13 05:22:16 2004 From: bob.oliver at cox.net (lupinlore) Date: Sat, 13 Nov 2004 05:22:16 -0000 Subject: McG punishing Harry and Draco (Re: Why has DD never suggested Snape thank Harry?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117745 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "potioncat" wrote: > > Potioncat: > McGonagall "assumed" that Harry had tricked Draco into wandering > around the castle at night by telling a wild story about a dragon. And yet she punished Draco as severely as she punished the Gryffindors. Blaming the victim? > McGonagall jumped all over Harry and the Weasley twin (Fred or > George) for "attacking" Draco after he really insulted their > mothers at the Quidditch game. But we don't know how that would have come out in the end, do we? Umbridge interfered before the scene and the situation could fully play itself out. Had she not done so, McGonagall would have probably insisted on, and gotten, a severe punishment for Draco. > Snape isn't the only one who takes Draco's side but no one ever > complains about Minnie. Because McGonagall *doesn't* take Draco's side. She comes down on everyone with a severity that is probably unwarranted at times, but at least even-handed. Lupinlore From bob.oliver at cox.net Sat Nov 13 05:33:05 2004 From: bob.oliver at cox.net (lupinlore) Date: Sat, 13 Nov 2004 05:33:05 -0000 Subject: Does Snape really favor Draco? (Re: Occlumency: Relax or resist?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117746 Kristen wrote: > So maybe Snape hopes to be a role model > for Draco. You known, steer him away from the death eaters, teach > him to respect knowledge, to not be confined by your families > expectations. Well, this brings up a number of points. This may be true of Snape, but if it is we have seen no evidence of it in Canon. That brings up a further point in the whole "Why Dumbledore lets Snape act the way he does" debate. One can argue that Snape is a good lesson for Gryffindors, and to a lesser extent Hufflepuffs and Ravenclaws, in dealing with difficult people. But where does that leave the Slytherins? Aren't they simply being reinforced in their belief that they are superior and should expect deferrence and favorable treatment simply because of who they are? Isn't Snape abusing them in much the same way that JKR sees the Dursleys abusing Dudley (i.e. he is preparing them for a world that doesn't exist, and insuring a life of pain and disappointment)? This of course brings up yet a further point about DD and the Slytherins. Up to this point we see no evidence that DD or Snape tries to actively wean them away from the Death Eaters. Now, it can be argued that realistically there is little DD can do, as he can't hope to successfully counteract the influence of their parents. Therefore maybe his attitude is to have Snape keep a watch on them and let the chips fall where they may. If so, however, it means he has simply washed his hands of the whole house, viewing them as a lost cause. And, one might ask, even if DD did try to wean the Slytherins away, how could Snape cooperate without "blowing his cover?" After all, DD's efforts could not be totally successful, and it would only take one recalcitrant Slythering complaining to his parents for Snape to be in very hot water indeed. Does DD buy Snape's cover at the cost of losing the Slytherins to Voldemort? Interesting questions. Lupinlore From bob.oliver at cox.net Sat Nov 13 05:38:50 2004 From: bob.oliver at cox.net (lupinlore) Date: Sat, 13 Nov 2004 05:38:50 -0000 Subject: Snape punishing Harry and Draco (Re: Why has DD never suggested Snape thank Harry?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117747 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "potioncat" wrote: > Potioncat: > So if Snape saw it was Malfoy's fault he should do nothing? Just > say, "Good afternoon boys" and walk on by? Well, he would not have had to have done that. The decent thing to do would have been to shut his mouth, turn around, and walk back down the dungeon steps without ever letting anyone know he'd seen anything. Lupinlore From figgys26cats at yahoo.com Sat Nov 13 06:08:21 2004 From: figgys26cats at yahoo.com (Kathleen Hunt) Date: Fri, 12 Nov 2004 22:08:21 -0800 (PST) Subject: DU treatment of Trelawney In-Reply-To: <20041113044745.2682.qmail@web53101.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041113060821.95690.qmail@web51705.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 117748 Juli wrote: > I think the reason DU picked on Trelawney was that > she's a bad teacher, I mean she can't see the future > even if her life depended on it, sure she's made 2 > real prophecies, but I doubt DU knew anything about > them. "figgys26cats": I agree that she was really bad, however it seemed even more than that. It just seemed to me that DU had it in for her from the start. From juli17 at aol.com Sat Nov 13 08:05:20 2004 From: juli17 at aol.com (juli17 at aol.com) Date: Sat, 13 Nov 2004 03:05:20 EST Subject: Harry taking credit for what he didnt do... Message-ID: <7f.50ffb241.2ec71a40@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 117749 TheMuffinMan writes: > > I know this is only a small little thing, but it has always bothered me what > Harry said to Draco at the end of Book 5: > > "'You're going to pay,' said Malfoy in a voice barely louder than a > whisper,'I'm going to make you've done to my father...' > > 'Well, I'm terrified now,' said Harry sarcastically,'I s'pose Lord > Voldemort's Just a warm up act for you three...'" > > The way Harry gloats in front of Draco, He tries to make it seem like HE > fought Voldie, when really when faced with the dark lord he froze up and had to > be saved by Dumbledore! I've always hated the fact that Harry said this, im > not sure why, but ive kind of lost a little respect in Harry after this. SO > whats everyone's opinion in this?? > I guess this is another example of how we each have our own perspective. I interpreted this passage quite differently. To me, Harry was comparing the relative fearsomeness of Draco and his cronies versus Lord Voldemort. I didn't perceive Harry's comments as a reference to his own ability/courage or lack thereof in Voldemort's presence. It was just Harry's way of telling Draco he was a feeble second to Voldemort in the threat department. Julie [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From willsonkmom at msn.com Sat Nov 13 11:51:32 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Sat, 13 Nov 2004 11:51:32 -0000 Subject: McG punishing Harry and Draco (Re: Why has DD never suggested Snape thank Harry?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117750 > > > > Potioncat: > > McGonagall "assumed" that Harry had tricked Draco into wandering > > around the castle at night by telling a wild story about a dragon. > >Lupinlore > And yet she punished Draco as severely as she punished the > Gryffindors. Blaming the victim? Potioncat: She docked Draco 20 points, Harry and the others 50. Draco was actively reisting her. And her point was that nothing gave him the excuse to be out of bounds. (I'll agree though the number of points is less important, to the actual punishment.) Oddly enough I don't remember Snape ever taking points from Harry for being out of bounds. The real victim is Neville who loses 50 points even though she thinks he was tricked too. >Potioncat > > McGonagall jumped all over Harry and the Weasley twin (Fred or > > George) for "attacking" Draco after he really insulted their > > mothers at the Quidditch game. > Lupinlore: > But we don't know how that would have come out in the end, do we? > Umbridge interfered before the scene and the situation could fully > play itself out. Had she not done so, McGonagall would have probably insisted on, and gotten, a severe punishment for Draco. Potioncat: We don't know that. It is very possible. Just as we do not know what Snape was going to do. The only thing I'm sure of is that she wouldn't have banned Harry and the twins from the team! Lupinlore: > Because McGonagall *doesn't* take Draco's side. She comes down on > everyone with a severity that is probably unwarranted at times, but at least even-handed. Potioncat: I think she does take Draco's side although I agree with the second part. I think she remembers some of the Marauder/Severus incidents and is reacting a little to that. I agree Snape is unfair. I'm not excusing it. In some cases he may think it is Harry's fault but he most likely just doesn't care. I think my point in this particular thread is that Snape wasn't being cruel to Harry in this scene. He was breaking up a fight and taking points from the one who looked like he started it. From willsonkmom at msn.com Sat Nov 13 11:55:48 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Sat, 13 Nov 2004 11:55:48 -0000 Subject: Does Snape really favor Draco? (Re: Occlumency: Relax or resist?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117751 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "lupinlore" wrote: > > Kristen wrote: > > > > So maybe Snape hopes to be a role model > > for Draco. You known, steer him away from the death eaters, teach > > him to respect knowledge, to not be confined by your families > > expectations. > > > Well, this brings up a number of points. This may be true of Snape, > but if it is we have seen no evidence of it in Canon. > > That brings up a further point in the whole "Why Dumbledore lets > Snape act the way he does" debate. One can argue that Snape is a > good lesson for Gryffindors, and to a lesser extent Hufflepuffs and > Ravenclaws, in dealing with difficult people. But where does that > leave the Slytherins? Aren't they simply being reinforced in their > belief that they are superior and should expect deferrence and > favorable treatment simply because of who they are? Isn't Snape > abusing them in much the same way that JKR sees the Dursleys abusing > Dudley (i.e. he is preparing them for a world that doesn't exist, and > insuring a life of pain and disappointment)? > > This of course brings up yet a further point about DD and the > Slytherins. Up to this point we see no evidence that DD or Snape > tries to actively wean them away from the Death Eaters. Now, it can > be argued that realistically there is little DD can do, as he can't > hope to successfully counteract the influence of their parents. > Therefore maybe his attitude is to have Snape keep a watch on them > and let the chips fall where they may. If so, however, it means he > has simply washed his hands of the whole house, viewing them as a > lost cause. > > And, one might ask, even if DD did try to wean the Slytherins away, > how could Snape cooperate without "blowing his cover?" After all, > DD's efforts could not be totally successful, and it would only take > one recalcitrant Slythering complaining to his parents for Snape to > be in very hot water indeed. Does DD buy Snape's cover at the cost > of losing the Slytherins to Voldemort? Potioncat: Good points. I agree. (Sorry List Elves, I had to pipe in.) From hannahmarder at yahoo.co.uk Sat Nov 13 12:04:33 2004 From: hannahmarder at yahoo.co.uk (Hannah) Date: Sat, 13 Nov 2004 12:04:33 -0000 Subject: Does Snape really favor Draco? (Re: Occlumency: Relax or resist?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117752 > Kristen wrote: > > > > So maybe Snape hopes to be a role model > > for Draco. You known, steer him away from the death eaters, teach him to respect knowledge, to not be confined by your families > > expectations. > > Lupinlore replied: But where does that leave the Slytherins? Aren't they simply being reinforced in their belief that they are superior and should expect deferrence and > favorable treatment simply because of who they are? Isn't Snape > abusing them in much the same way that JKR sees the Dursleys abusing > Dudley (i.e. he is preparing them for a world that doesn't exist, and > insuring a life of pain and disappointment)? > > This of course brings up yet a further point about DD and the > Slytherins. Up to this point we see no evidence that DD or Snape > tries to actively wean them away from the Death Eaters. Now, it can > be argued that realistically there is little DD can do he has simply washed his hands of the whole house, viewing them as a lost cause. > Interesting questions. Hannah: Very interesting questions. Discussing things to do with Slytherin house and the treatment of its students is always tricky, because we get such a skewed view of it from canon. I can't believe that every single Slytherin is a Draco Malfoy clone, convinced of their superiority, mean and stupid in the extreme, with DE's for parents. But that is certainly the impression that canon gives at present (oh for the introduction of that 'good' Slytherin!). But do Slytherin students really get that great a deal? They are loathed by everybody who isn't one, with the other three houses banding together against them. There seems to be a general view in some parts of the WW that all dark wizards were Slytherins (as expounded by Hagrid in PS), even though that can't be true (Pettigrew was one, people happily believed Sirius was one, etc.). Do they expect (or get) favourable treatment from anyone? Really, Snape is the only one we see in canon treating them better than other students. In fact, we see at least one example of Slytherins as a whole getting treated badly. At the end of PS, when DD awards the points to Gryffindor, snatching the cup from Slytherin. Harry had faced Quirrel several days before - DD could have meted out the points then. But no, he has to wait until everyone is in the Great Hall, decked out in the Slytherin colours, before suddenly taking it away from them. Of course Harry and his friends deserved those points, but did all of the c.70 students in Slytherin deserve to be disappointed in such a cruel way? No one seems to give a stuff though, apart from Snape. Why does DD not try (or appear to try) to wean them away from the DE's? For the reasons you gave, that it likely wouldn't work. Obviously there is a general anti-DE message given out to the whole school, but it's a bit like drugs education, I suppose. You can tell children again and again that they're bad, throw tonnes of money at awareness campaigns, but plenty of kids will still take them. As for DD washing his hands of the whole house, that implies that every single Slytherin is going to become a DE. And even Hagrid doesn't go as far as saying that all Slytherins are dark wizards (just that all dark wizards are Slytherins, which isn't true anyway). I still think it's a significant minority, rather than all or even most of them. A world where 25% people are pure evil is ridiculous, and I don't think JKR would create such a place. And it would make the job of the Aurors much easier - arrest all Slytherins. I don't see Snape as having any role in weaning Slytherins away from the DE's. The guy is on thin ice anyway, and keeping him as a spy is far more beneficial to the Order than any unlikely-to-suceed attempts to stop children joining LV when they graduate. Going back to the original question, I see no evidence that Snape is trying to teach Draco to not be confined by his family's expectations, or to respect knowledge. I think Snape secretly despises Draco (he would be out of character not to) but he has to keep up appearances. Hannah Fanfic at www.schnoogle.com/authorLinks/Hannah_Marder/ From spotthedungbeetle at hotmail.com Sat Nov 13 12:10:24 2004 From: spotthedungbeetle at hotmail.com (dungrollin) Date: Sat, 13 Nov 2004 12:10:24 -0000 Subject: Brain room In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117753 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Megan" wrote: > > Flop: > > > Just a trippy sort of thought that's been bouncing > > around in my brain: What if they never WERE somebody's > > brains? I'm toying with this wild concept of the MoM > > developing sort of "free-standing" brains kind of as a > > data-storage thing like Wizard computer > > hard-drives?... Okay, that's wilder than it sounded > > before I typed it out. Any thoughts?... > > "Megan" replies: > > I agree... I was thinking along the lines of the Epistemological > Philosophy paper by Hilary Putnam "Brains in a Vat"... and all of > the lovely epistemological implications that ensue from that... (I > mentioned it in my Epistemology class - in Philosophy - and all > > the other students just stared at me, so I guess they don't know > about/haven't read yet book five!) > > Any thoughts eh? Dungrollin: My mind immediately turned to Brains in a Vat too, and then the Daniel C. Dennet essay 'Where am I?' in which a man has his brain removed, and elaborate minuscule radio links fitted to each nerve ending, so that it can still control his body. He then stands outside the vat looking in at his brain, trying to work out where *he* is, and trying to imagine that his thought processes are going on inside the vat, while his eyes are outside looking in at it. Lovely stuff. Someone else suggested somewhere, that the brains were a physical manifestation of what was being studied in that room, i.e. thought. But brains are useful for many more things than just thinking. Collation of sensory data into experience, experience into memories, and a whole host of unconscious homeostatic processes. I'd love it to be the room where the unspeakables study experimental epistemology. But given that JKR hasn't even furnished us with a definition of the Dark Arts, and it's been Harry's best subject for five years, somehow, I doubt that we're going to get a very in-depth explanation... Dungrollin Astonished to find that there's a blue sky and sunshine outside - just like she's read about in books! From hannahmarder at yahoo.co.uk Sat Nov 13 12:12:00 2004 From: hannahmarder at yahoo.co.uk (Hannah) Date: Sat, 13 Nov 2004 12:12:00 -0000 Subject: Lockhart's house Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117754 I was just wondering, does anyone know what house Gilderoy Lockhart was in? The comments he makes in CoS before the first Quidditch match suggest he favours Gryffindor. But surely he wouldn't have been in Gryffindor, being an utter coward. Ravenclaw? Not clever enough. Hufflepuff? Not loyal or hardworking. I'd have him down as the perfect Slytherin - ruthlessly determined to be famous, and not afraid to use any means (including destroying the minds of heroic witches and wizards without any qualms) in order to get there. Has this been discussed before? Is there anything in canon/ JKR interviews that I've missed to give us a clue? Hannah From Zarleycat at aol.com Sat Nov 13 12:21:29 2004 From: Zarleycat at aol.com (kiricat2001) Date: Sat, 13 Nov 2004 12:21:29 -0000 Subject: Bella's Backstory In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117755 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "ericoppen" wrote: > > You know, I'd dearly love to hear Bellatrix Lestrange's story---how > it was that she became what she now is. If it's true that you "have > to mean" the Cruciatus Curse, then what was it that teed her off that > badly? Marianne: I would imagine that rage/anger are only one means to be a successful Cruciator (is that an acceptable word?). I see Bella as maniacally strong in her worship of Voldemort and all of the pureblooded superiority nonsense he spouts. I also suspect that this was the lifeline she held onto in Azkaban. She would tend to see non- purebloods as lesser beings and fully derserving of any treatment she chose to gave them. She wouldn't have to be angry to kill a "Mudblood." In her world view, they are a stain on society and should be exterminated. Just whip out that wand and squash that bug. That probably makes her a good torturer, too. She has no empathy for people she deems unworthy. It's easy for her to torture the Longbottoms and then, years later, taunt Neville about it. People who stand in Voldemort's way are either impure thus deserving of death, or misguided purebloods, who are traitors to the cause, and thus, also deserving of death. With a worldview like that, who needs anger? Marianne, wondering how she missed that forecast about snow From elsyee_h at yahoo.com Sat Nov 13 13:41:07 2004 From: elsyee_h at yahoo.com (Tammy) Date: Sat, 13 Nov 2004 13:41:07 -0000 Subject: Snape punishing Harry and Draco (Re: Why has DD never suggested Snape thank Harr In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117756 > > Potioncat: > > So if Snape saw it was Malfoy's fault he should do nothing? Just > > say, "Good afternoon boys" and walk on by? > > Lupinlore: > Well, he would not have had to have done that. The decent thing to > do would have been to shut his mouth, turn around, and walk back down > the dungeon steps without ever letting anyone know he'd seen anything. > Tammy replies: Oh please, if Snape had done that everyone would then be screaming that he was neglecting his duty as a teacher. Whether Snape saw the beginning or not, he had a duty to stop one student from hexing another... remember that little thing about no magic in the halls? It's called rules people, Snape loves to live by them, plain and simple. And had Harry actually completed his task and injured Draco, what do you think would have happened to him then? Much worse than a mere 10 points off Gryffindor. -Tammy From mgrantwich at yahoo.com Sat Nov 13 13:51:31 2004 From: mgrantwich at yahoo.com (Magda Grantwich) Date: Sat, 13 Nov 2004 05:51:31 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Occlumency: Relax or resist? Does Snape really favor Draco? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041113135131.98032.qmail@web53108.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 117757 > So maybe Snape hopes to be a role model > for Draco. You known, steer him away from the death eaters, teach > him to respect knowledge, to not be confined by your families > expectations. > > Kristen I've always had the feeling that Snape's relationship with Draco was something of a parody of Dumbledore's relationship with Harry. Sort of Snape's way of saying, "If you can have a pet, so can I." Beyond that, I think there are sound practical reasons for being close to Draco. The kid is a natural blabber and I'm sure loves to talk it up in Slytherin Common Room about what's happening at Malfoy Manor - and I'm sure much of that info comes to Snape. Magda __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com From R.Vink2 at chello.nl Sat Nov 13 13:59:06 2004 From: R.Vink2 at chello.nl (Renee) Date: Sat, 13 Nov 2004 13:59:06 -0000 Subject: Bad guys and black hats (was Re: Unreliable narrator) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117758 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "dumbledore11214" wrote: > > > Renee: > > Then this is where we must agree to disagree. IMO a (contemporary) > > literary text should basically speak for itself - barring > > explanations to readers from a different cultural environment, > > perhaps. If authors need to explain what they're trying to convey, there's something not quite right. It's a form of telling, instead of showing. > > Alla: > > I meant to clarify it right away, but somehow forgot, sorry. > > I just wanted to say that I value author's intention, when > character's motivations could be interpreted in several different > ways. In that situation, when I am kind of confused, I guess and I > have to choose the interpretation, I will go with author's > intention as I understand it. > > Take Snape, for example. :o) She says that he is sadistic teacher > and not that I had many doubts about that quality of his, but I > still thought that maybe he plays at least a little bit. When I > hear such quote from the author's mouth, I am fully convinced. > > Again, not that text did not speak for itself, but it kinda help > me eliminate my doubts. > > I am afraid I am not making much sense. > Take the situation with Voldemort, for example. I have quite clear > opinion of him and no matter how many times Rowling says that her > bad guys are not conventional black hats, it won't help her case in > mind, unless indeed she will show it to me in the story. > > So, I don't think we are that much in the disagreement. Renee: One, you're making perfect sense to me, and two, we're certainly not diametrically opposed. It's not that I'm averse to all authorial comments, as the last part of my post regarding the use of Voldemort's name indicates; if a question baffles me, the author's answer would be most welcome. And I never meant to reject things like - actual information about something (middle names or eye colours) - correcting of misconceptions and cutting off wrong speculations (Q: "Was Lily a Death Eater?" A:"You ought to be ashamed of yourself!"), - all kinds of clues, or even red herrings, even though I'm not inclined to speculate a lot - statements informing us that something really has no significance (the family name of Mark Evans) It's only when JKR tells us what to think of certain characters and events and how she mean things to come across that I tend to balk and say: "Show, don't tell!" What would you have done if you hadn't considered Snape a sadistic teacher, or conversely, if JKR had said he's mostly play-acting? Would you have rejected her comment like you reject the one about the conventional black hats? Can you really do this: accept those authorial comments that confirm your own judgement and interpretation but reject those that don't? Well, maybe you can. Ultimately this would mean that JKR's opinion in such matters doesn't weigh to heavily with you if you feel free to take it or leave it - just like anyone else's. And I can't say I disagree with that. Renee From willsonkmom at msn.com Sat Nov 13 14:08:47 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Sat, 13 Nov 2004 14:08:47 -0000 Subject: Bad guys and black hats (was Re: Unreliable narrator) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117759 Alla wrote: > > Take Snape, for example. :o) She says that he is sadistic teacher > > and not that I had many doubts about that quality of his, but I > > still thought that maybe he plays at least a little bit. When I > > hear such quote from the author's mouth, I am fully convinced. > > >>>Renee: > It's only when JKR tells us what to think of certain characters and events and how she mean things to come across that I tend to balk and say: "Show, don't tell!" > > What would you have done if you hadn't considered Snape a sadistic > teacher, or conversely, if JKR had said he's mostly play-acting? > Would you have rejected her comment like you reject the one about > the conventional black hats? Can you really do this: accept those > authorial comments that confirm your own judgement and > interpretation but reject those that don't? Potioncat: Did I read this correctly? Has JKR said Snape is acting? In JKR's defense, she is being bombarded with questions about characters. She can hardly refuse to answer. There she is, on the spot, and whether she thought the character was perfectly clear, or whether she intended some confusion on our part, she needs to say something. Of course, she could refuse to give interviews at all. > From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com Sat Nov 13 14:04:43 2004 From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (Barry Arrowsmith) Date: Sat, 13 Nov 2004 14:04:43 +0000 Subject: Who knows? DD knows, that's who. Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117760 It's been a while since I've let my paranoia off the leash, to snuffle after hot scents, cold trails and red herrings. Time for another outing, I think, probably to the dismay (or irritation) of 'sensible' posters. But cheer up, it's all canon-based thinking. Mind you, what a suspicious mind can do with canon is nobody's business. OK. It's that Prophecy again. Sort of. Looking at it from a slightly different angle though, and not trying to interpret the words for once. You're probably all aware of the respect I have for Jo's sneakiness; her ability to concoct a scenario that turns out not to be quite what it seems at first sight. I'm wondering if she's done it again. Remember when OoP came out, how HP junkies leapt with delighted cries on fresh meat after 3 years of left-overs? What fun! And that Prophecy! Ooh! Here was something to get our teeth into! Only we didn't. It's as obscure now as the day it was printed. Disgruntlement all round, plus some suggestions that it was incomplete, fixed by DD or everything in it had already happened. There it sat on a shelf in the Ministry, gathering dust, complete with it's own little label dated 16 years previously - "S.P.T. to A.P.W.B.D. Dark Lord and (?)Harry Potter. In his usual end of book explication DD adds the following: "The official record was re-labelled after Voldemort's attack on you as a child. It seemed plain to the keeper of the Hall of Prophecy that Voldemort could only have tried to kill you because he knew you to be the one to whom Sybill was referring." This is somewhat at odds with the next passage after Harry brings up the possibility that it could be Neville: "He chose the boy he thought most likely to be a danger to him," Oh yes? And on what evidence did Voldy base this assessment and how the hell does DD know? We're talking inner-most thoughts and fears here; it's unlikely to have been a topic of conversation down at the DE Glee Club. But DD goes further: "He saw himself in you before he had ever seen you [...] gave you powers, and a future, which have fitted you to escape him not once, but four times so far..." It changes from knowing to choosing; from a certainty to a guess (albeit an educated one) on Voldy's part. Mind you, the Ministry seem to be hedging their bets - they left that question mark there. But DD expresses no doubts, it's Harry. All well and good, you may think; however there are a few grey areas that niggle. Recall when the globe broke; did we hear any of it? No. Not one single word. Harry didn't identify the Seer, not even the sex of the Seer - it's an 'it'. There are the eyes, "hugely magnified" which match the figure from the Pensieve, so it'll be Sybill unless the author's cheating, but there is no way to determine that the unheard words in the Ministry match those of the Pensieve. As it stands the only person who has heard both is DD. Whether that means anything depends on how much you trust DD. He may well be the epitome of goodness but that doesn't necessarily mean that he's not above stacking the deck, gaining an advantage or manipulating those around him - all in a good cause, naturally. I always feel much more comfortable when there's some independent confirmation of DD's little declarations. He has a tendency to slip very interesting information in amongst a load of guff, and naturally it goes right over Harry's head. Not the sharpest tool in the box, our Harry; always seems to miss the opportunity for the really telling question. And here's another instance in the quote above - "He saw himself in you before he'd ever seen you..." Excuse me? How can this be? What did Voldy know of Harry before GH? This could open up a whole new cauldron of Flobberworms. From existing canon we get hints that the Potters were not total unknowns to his Evilness. For a start he knows the first few phrases of the Prophecy, up as far as "born to those who have thrice defied him" according to DD. We can be sure that the defiance was a bit more than turning down an offer for double-glazing. It'd be significant; enough to put the Potters on Voldy's shit list. But then DD goes on - "Consequently, he could not warn his master that to attack you would be to risk transferring power to you,..." Eh? Where does it say that in the Prophecy? Have I missed something? It surely can't mean that "the power he knows not" was transferred from Voldy, can it? 'Cos that's the only power mentioned and there's not hint of a transfer - just the marking. Uh-oh. The mark. The scar. The sign that identifies - or is it 'bestows'? - equality. The scar that DD said could come in useful. Yes, damn right; added powers are always useful and that 'scar' looks like it could be more than a healed wound; more than a warning device, too. A curiously shaped affair, like a bolt of lightning. Now were have I seen something like that before? Ah, yes; collar tabs on a nazi uniform; a stylised "S" - only this time it stands for Slytherin. I suggested in post 108664 "Shared thoughts" that all the keys to HP happened before the books started, that we'd arrived halfway through the second act. Jo thinks so too, having said that if we knew the 'whys' of what happened between Harry and Voldy at GH there'd be no need to write the last two books. There'll be more to it than just that, I hope; a few deaths, a bucket or two of blood. Additionally, there're hints that GH itself is the culmination of of as yet unknown happenings - there's that curious phrasing of Hagrid's in PS/SS - ".... the myst'ry is why You-Know-Who never tried to get 'em on his side before..." Hmm. Before. As in previously. An overture made, just the once? Or does it signify "before Harry was born" because afterwards it was too late? Is this where the defiance x3 comes in? Is this why there's that puzzling gap of 15 months or so between birth and Voldy coming a-calling? Was Voldy looking for some other outcome? To add spice there's the strange familiarity evident at GH - "He's here!" no name necessary; "Stand aside, you silly girl... stand aside now..." No exclamation marks, no vehemence - just an inevitable conclusion given what had gone before? I have a liking for chains of events; for one thing leading almost inexorably to something else; it's intellectually satisfying to tie things together. This chain's not complete yet. But if DD would just leak a leetle more it might be. Two things - 1. DD knows much more than he's let on so far, 2. I bet there's more to come about prophecies; I bet there's another one somewhere, probably from Cassandra Trelawney. Bet Voldy knows about it too; bet he thinks Sybill's adds to it. The thing is, with a name like Cassandra did anyone believe it? Kneasy P.S. I notice that while I was cobbling this together iris_ft put up a post that also wonders at events pre-GH. Good oh. Two heads are better than one. From mgrantwich at yahoo.com Sat Nov 13 14:13:51 2004 From: mgrantwich at yahoo.com (Magda Grantwich) Date: Sat, 13 Nov 2004 06:13:51 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Why has DD never suggested Snape thank Harry? (Was: Why has DD never suggest In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041113141351.46091.qmail@web53101.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 117761 > Alla: > > Didn't Snape hear the whole conversation? I may be wrong, since no > books with me right now, but that is my recollection. Right now I > will argue that he knew that Malfoy was out of line first. No, Snape did not hear the conversation. He emerged from the dungeon stairs just as Harry and Draco went for their wands and Harry pulled his out first. > It seems more logical to me that if Snape is still a double agent, > he > has to be double nice to Harry - to convince Vodelmort that > Dumbledore believes that Snape can be trusted (you know treat the > Boy who lived as friend, not an enemy) There's no evidence that Snape is still a double agent. None. That is a fan-fic staple. There's more reason to convince Draco that he's anti-Harry because of who Draco's father is - there's some evidence that Lucius and Snape have some kind of connection (at least according to Umbridge). Magda __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From R.Vink2 at chello.nl Sat Nov 13 14:18:43 2004 From: R.Vink2 at chello.nl (Renee) Date: Sat, 13 Nov 2004 14:18:43 -0000 Subject: =?iso-8859-1?q?Re:_JKR=92s_giant_mistake=3F?= In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117762 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "nkafkafi" wrote: > > > Pippin: > > "Red herring" refers to the misleading clue itself. A mistaken > > belief based on false evidence or faulty reasoning is generally > > referred to as a superstition. > > Neri: > Aren't you using slightly too strong words? While there is no absolute > proof that the bad guys can't say the name Voldemort, canon does seem > to suggest it. Renee: I have a problem with the word superstition, with its connotations of irrationality and false religion. Methinks "fallacy" suits Pippin's definition better. That is, it would if we knew for certain the evidence and/or the reasoning were faulty, which I don't think is the case. Even if you can argue that there is an explanation for every instance a bad guy says "Voldemort", this still doesn't constitute evidence that some of these cases weren't oversights. The contradiction between what canon strongly suggests and the use of Voldemort's name by a few particular characters, remains. That the narrator is unreliable and therefore possibly wrong about this, doesn't mean he's unreliable all the time (if he were, he'd be reliable again, if you see what I mean), and therefore actually wrong about it. I keep saying we need more information, though I agree with everyone who said that saying "Voldemort" doesn't separate the white sheep from the black. Renee From mgrantwich at yahoo.com Sat Nov 13 14:40:40 2004 From: mgrantwich at yahoo.com (Magda Grantwich) Date: Sat, 13 Nov 2004 06:40:40 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] DU treatment of Trelawny In-Reply-To: <20041113000249.21782.qmail@web51702.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041113144040.73349.qmail@web53106.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 117763 --- Kathleen Hunt wrote: > I'm sorry if this has been covered in the past, but I would like to > know if any of you have a theory on why Umbridge hated and picked > on > Trelawny? Trelawny mentioned that Seers have been persecuted for > years, > but why? Was Trelawny considered part human because of her gift? I > would say no, but I don't understand why DU went after her. > Please let me know. Delores Umbridge is a classic authoritarian fascist: a woman of low intelligence (albeit strong cunning) and almost no imagination at all who is suspicious of anything that is not ordained or initiated by the MoM. Such things are somehow suspect or dangerous in her opinion. She distrusts people who don't have the same priorities and values she has - Dumbledore because he seems to be a power in his own right and has little respect for either Fudge or the Ministry. (Slight sidetrack: this means that someone like Lucius Malfoy can run rings around her because if he pays lipservice to her prejudices, she never questions that person's sincerity.) Trelawney is a seer, and seeing is dangerous because it's unpredictable and therefore not easily controlled by the MoM. The whole idea of filing prophecies on shelves and putting restrictions on them to make sure only the subjects can touch them is somekind of redtape bureacratic small-mindedness that was invented years ago to contain seeing: "well, we can't stop it from happening, but we can make darn sure that it's as difficult as possible for anyone to find out about it!" So the MoM doesn't encourage seers and seeing, and that's partly it. But it's also DU's sadistic nature to derive enjoyment from sending Trelawney close to a complete mental and emotional collapse from the sheer bullying enjoyment of it. Trelawney was a great victim; DU enjoyed herself very much. And the third reason might be that both Hagrid and Trelawney were regarded by the MoM already as people under Dumbledore's personal protection as teachers, unlike the others who had demonstrable competence in their fields. 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 Nov 13 14:47:30 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Sat, 13 Nov 2004 14:47:30 -0000 Subject: Why has DD never suggested Snape thank Harry? (Was: Why has DD never suggest In-Reply-To: <20041113141351.46091.qmail@web53101.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117764 Magda: > There's no evidence that Snape is still a double agent. None. That > is a fan-fic staple. There's more reason to convince Draco that he's > anti-Harry because of who Draco's father is - there's some evidence > that Lucius and Snape have some kind of connection (at least > according to Umbridge). > Alla: LOL! No need to convince me that Snape is not a double-agent. I agree with that. I thought you were arguing that he had to "maintain his cover in front of Draco and Co. I am confused now. Sorry. From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Sat Nov 13 14:55:14 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Sat, 13 Nov 2004 14:55:14 -0000 Subject: Harry taking credit for what he didnt do... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117765 Snow wrote : " First off Dumbledore couldn't have saved Harry at the Ministry at the time of the possession if he wanted to! " Del replies : Just a little detail : there would have been no possession episode to start with, if DD hadn't sent the statue in the path of the AK LV put on Harry. Del From willsonkmom at msn.com Sat Nov 13 14:59:47 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Sat, 13 Nov 2004 14:59:47 -0000 Subject: Who knows? DD knows, that's who. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117766 Snipping here and there, Potioncat is writing a long winded "Me too" post: Kneasy wrote: > OK. It's that Prophecy again. snip > > There it sat on a shelf in the Ministry, gathering dust, complete with > it's own little label dated 16 years previously - > "S.P.T. to A.P.W.B.D. Dark Lord and (?)Harry Potter. > > In his usual end of book explication DD adds the following: > "The official record was re-labelled after Voldemort's attack on you as > a child. It seemed plain to the keeper of the Hall of Prophecy that > Voldemort could only have tried to kill you because he knew you to be > the one to whom Sybill was referring." Potioncat: Dark Lord? Was the keeper of the Hall a (former) Death Eater? DD doesn't tell us what the label said before. Nor does he say if he agrees with the change. Kneasy: > Two things - > 1. DD knows much more than he's let on so far, > 2. I bet there's more to come about prophecies; I bet there's another > one somewhere, probably from Cassandra Trelawney. > Bet Voldy knows about it too; bet he thinks Sybill's adds to it. > The thing is, with a name like Cassandra did anyone believe it? > Potioncat: The first is a given. Not only that but he plays with time a good deal when he explains things. It really isn't clear why the eavesdropper was thrown out or when DD discovered that event and it isn't clear if it was a person with his/her ear to the door or a dirty rat sniffing about the baseboards. Or when the information made it to LV. The second is almost a given as well. How important were the bits we overheard during the MoM battle and did they have anything to do with all this? It still nags at my mind that Lupin's boggart could be a prophecy orb. In spite of the very likely moon option, inspite of very good reasons to avoid Sybill's fortune telling...And he doesn't have to be ESE!Lupin to be tied to this some way. Nor does he need to be willing. Playing with a prophecy can be as dangerous as playing with a Time- Turner. And maybe DD really doesn't dare be more clear. Let's hope that if he knows everything, that he also knows what he's doing. MagicFolk do strange things with words. One of my favorite jokes ends like this: "And for my third wish, make me irresistible to women." Poof, the genie turned the man into a box of chocolates. Potioncat From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Sat Nov 13 15:04:43 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Sat, 13 Nov 2004 15:04:43 -0000 Subject: Harry taking credit for what he didnt do... In-Reply-To: <111220042015.825.419519C700018E09000003392200737478CECECCCF020E03020700009A030A089B@comcast.net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117767 TheMuffinMan wrote : " The way Harry gloats in front of Draco, He tries to make it seem like HE fought Voldie, when really when faced with the dark lord he froze up and had to be saved by Dumbledore!" Del comments : 1. You're suicidal, MuffinMan, for saying such things on this list. Don't worry, you're not the only one. 2. As Annemehr pointed out, Harry did fight LV at the end of GoF. 3. Harry being I'm-not-playing-by-the-rules!Harry, we don't know for sure that the AK LV put on Harry would have killed him for sure. Probability is that it would, which would mean that DD saved him indeed, but you never know. 4. It's not so much the fact that Harry reminds Draco that he fought LV that bothers me. It's the fact that he dismissed Draco so easily. Harry's father made exactly the same kind of mistake : assuming that someone couldn't be dangerous, and we know where it got him. I say Harry had better be very careful and stop assuming Draco is no real menace. Maybe Draco is really harmless, but maybe he's not. As Moody would say : constant vigilance. Del From mgrantwich at yahoo.com Sat Nov 13 15:08:20 2004 From: mgrantwich at yahoo.com (Magda Grantwich) Date: Sat, 13 Nov 2004 07:08:20 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Lockhart's house In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041113150820.79850.qmail@web53103.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 117768 --- Hannah wrote: > I was just wondering, does anyone know what house Gilderoy Lockhart > was in? The comments he makes in CoS before the first Quidditch > match suggest he favours Gryffindor. But surely he wouldn't have > been in Gryffindor, being an utter coward. Ravenclaw? Not clever > enough. Hufflepuff? Not loyal or hardworking. I'd have him down > as the perfect Slytherin - ruthlessly determined to be famous, and > not afraid to use any means (including destroying the minds of > heroic witches and wizards without any qualms) in order to get > there. There's no reason he couldn't have been a Gryffindor. Pettigrew was a Gryffindor, after all. The flip side of bravery is bravado - a false bravery hiding something much less. And properly administered memory charms don't "destroy the mind", despite what happened to him. Magda __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com From mgrantwich at yahoo.com Sat Nov 13 15:16:31 2004 From: mgrantwich at yahoo.com (Magda Grantwich) Date: Sat, 13 Nov 2004 07:16:31 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Humour: Why Harry probably shoudn't have kids In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041113151631.88400.qmail@web53106.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 117769 --- curlyhornedsnorkack wrote: > And so on! I think the first one's pretty good. I hope others can > come up with better ones. > PS: This is my first post, ever. > Very clever, CHSA. Make sure you post often. I enjoyed this one very much. Magda __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com From aletamay01 at yahoo.com Sat Nov 13 15:24:45 2004 From: aletamay01 at yahoo.com (hogsheadbarmaid) Date: Sat, 13 Nov 2004 15:24:45 -0000 Subject: =?iso-8859-1?q?Re:_JKR=92s_giant_mistake=3F?= In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117770 > > > Pippin: > > > "Red herring" refers to the misleading clue itself. A mistaken > > > belief based on false evidence or faulty reasoning is generally > > > referred to as a superstition. > > > > Neri: > > Aren't you using slightly too strong words? While there is no > absolute > > proof that the bad guys can't say the name Voldemort, canon does > seem > > to suggest it. > > Renee: > I have a problem with the word superstition, with its connotations > of irrationality and false religion. Methinks "fallacy" suits > Pippin's definition better. > > That is, it would if we knew for certain the evidence and/or the > reasoning were faulty, which I don't think is the case. Even if you > can argue that there is an explanation for every instance a bad guy > says "Voldemort", this still doesn't constitute evidence that some > of these cases weren't oversights. The contradiction between what > canon strongly suggests and the use of Voldemort's name by a few > particular characters, remains. That the narrator is unreliable and > therefore possibly wrong about this, doesn't mean he's unreliable > all the time (if he were, he'd be reliable again, if you see what I > mean), and therefore actually wrong about it. > > I keep saying we need more information, though I agree with everyone > who said that saying "Voldemort" doesn't separate the white sheep > from the black. > > Renee barmaid tries again to enter this thread: It seems to me that the DE's do not say the name because of fear yes, but also a certain kind of respect, almost love or awe or religious devotion to the Dark Lord. The name by itself, especially without the "Lord" in front of it sounds too familiar or informal -- disrespectful. These people, the DE's have banked everything on the idea that LV is "the one". To casually use his name minimizes his power, which is exactly why DD wants people to use it. I will pose my question from further up this thread here again. When did people stop saying the name and why? It seems likely that there was a time when it was widely spoken -- it is certainly widely known - - so when and how did this name taboo come in to play. I personally use the word superstition all the time whenever someone (usually me) confuses coincidence with cause and effect. I find it to be a particularly useful concept in dealing with computer problems. I think it could be appropriate to this name issue as well. --barmaid From willsonkmom at msn.com Sat Nov 13 15:25:59 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Sat, 13 Nov 2004 15:25:59 -0000 Subject: Harry taking credit for what he didnt do... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117771 Del wrote: snip > 4. It's not so much the fact that Harry reminds Draco that he fought > LV that bothers me. It's the fact that he dismissed Draco so easily. > Harry's father made exactly the same kind of mistake : assuming that > someone couldn't be dangerous, and we know where it got him. I say > Harry had better be very careful and stop assuming Draco is no real > menace. Maybe Draco is really harmless, but maybe he's not. As Moody > would say : constant vigilance. > Potioncat: That's what I think Snape is up to. He comes in, docks Gryffindors and breaks things up. I always thought it was Harry he was looking out for, not Draco. It seems odd, knowing as we do how good Harry is. But Harry admits himself it was often luck that got him out of jams. No matter how good Harry is, Snape may very well know how "bad" Draco is. From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Sat Nov 13 15:50:05 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Sat, 13 Nov 2004 15:50:05 -0000 Subject: Why has DD never suggested Snape thank Harry? (Was: Why has DD never suggest In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117773 > Magda: > > > No, Snape did not hear the conversation. He emerged from the > dungeon > > stairs just as Harry and Draco went for their wands and Harry > pulled > > his out first. Alla: Sorry, no. I had to reread it again, just in case. Hary notices Snape emerging from the stairs at that moment. We don't know how long he was standing here and how much have he heard and saw. From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Sat Nov 13 16:13:53 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Sat, 13 Nov 2004 16:13:53 -0000 Subject: Did DD lie about the Prophecy ? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117774 I'm still gathering information for my designed-weapon!Harry theory, and I've come accross another set of questions. First, let's examine what we believe about the circumstances surrounding the first prophecy. - It was delivered months before it would come true. - It was delivered when Trelawney was talking to DD in the middle of a crowded pub. - It was delivered to DD. Now, let's see about the second prophecy. It was delivered : - on the afternoon of the day things would happen - when Harry and Trelawney were alone - to Harry alone We don't know anything about how the Seer gift works. Because of that, we don't know what kinds of conditions it works under, if any. How practical ! But let's assume that it doesn't just work at random, and that some kinds of conditions must be met. In that case, the major differences between the circumstances in which the two prophecies were given strike me as suspicious. 1. In the second case, the prophecy was given just before it happened. In the first case, it is supposed to have been given several weeks before. But is this true ? Could it be that the prophecy was given on the very day Harry was born ? After all, it would make sense that DD would be interviewing an applicant to a teaching post in the middle of the holidays. 2. In the second case, the Prophecy is delivered only to a specific recipient. In the first one, it is delivered to (potentially) a whole room of people. Trelawney could have given her second prophecy during class, for example. But no, she waited for her *only* opportunity to see Harry in private. Inversely, she supposedly delivered her first prophecy in circumstances where other people could overhear her. So I'm wondering : did DD outright lie when he pretended the prophecy was given in the Hog's head ? After all, *why* would he have interviewed Trelawney there ? She had taken a room at the pub, granted, but I would expect that she would have gone up to the castle, to DD's office, for her interview. That's the way things happen usually : applicants come to the boss's office. *Especially* when the boss is not interested in filling the post to start with : DD said he didn't intend to continue the Divination class. So why would he go all the way to Hogsmeade to meet a potential applicant, instead of having her come to her office ? Or did he also lie about the reason he was meeting her in the first place ? Did he not want some people to know that he was meeting Trelawney ? Or maybe he never met her to start with, and he was never the one the prophecy was delivered to. Which brings me to my third point : 3. In the second case, the prophecy was given to the person who would be instrumental in making it happen : Harry is the only person really responsible for making the prophecy come true. Without Harry's plea to spare Peter's life, Sirius and Remus would have killed Peter, and the prophecy would never have become true. Of course, other factors contributed to it, like Remus forgetting to take his potion and transforming at a most inappropriate time, or Snape failing to make himself useful, but those were failures to do better, not conscious decisions to change the course of events. Only Harry did that : only Harry forced the course of events to change. In the other case, the prophecy was delivered to someone who apparently had nothing to do with the whole matter : DD had nothing to do with Harry being born. Or did he ? DD was neither a member of Harry's family or his godfather or the Healer helping Lily give birth (as far as we know) or anything. Why deliver the prophecy to him ? That raises some interesting possibilities. a) Maybe DD was *not* the one Trelawney delivered the prophecy to. Maybe he was an eavesdropper. Maybe he got hold of the prophecy in some other way (Legilimency). Maybe whoever really received the prophecy put their memory in DD's pensieve. b) Maybe DD was *hugely* instrumental in Harry's birth and/or destiny. Maybe the prophecy was delivered to him because there was something he needed to do in order to make the prophecy come true. Or maybe he had *already* done something, and the prophecy was only telling him of the consequences of his actions. And what about the eavesdropper ? Did he really exist ? Or did DD invent him to cover something else ? Did DD purposefully feed a part of the prophecy to LV ? Did DD manipulate the events leading to GH to obtain that *precise* result : Scarred!Harry and Vapormort ? What do you think ? Del From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Sat Nov 13 16:14:26 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Sat, 13 Nov 2004 16:14:26 -0000 Subject: Bad guys and black hats (was Re: Unreliable narrator) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117775 > Renee: snip. > What would you have done if you hadn't considered Snape a sadistic > teacher, or conversely, if JKR had said he's mostly play-acting? > Would you have rejected her comment like you reject the one about > the conventional black hats? Can you really do this: accept those > authorial comments that confirm your own judgement and > interpretation but reject those that don't? > > Well, maybe you can. Ultimately this would mean that JKR's opinion > in such matters doesn't weigh to heavily with you if you feel free > to take it or leave it - just like anyone else's. And I can't say I disagree with that. Alla: Actually, do you know what I realised? Yes, if I was 100% sure that Snape is not a sadistic teacher , I would have rejected JKR's comment. My rule is when in doubt use author's intention. I guess I am doing exactly that - only taking author's intention to faith when it suits me. :o) When it strengthens my argument of what "so and so" means. Does it mean that in reality author's intention does not mean that much to me as used to think it means? Could be. And, NO, Potioncat, to the best of my knowledge JKR did not say that Snape was "acting". LOL! :) From madettebeau at gmail.com Sat Nov 13 16:32:18 2004 From: madettebeau at gmail.com (madlysarcastic) Date: Sat, 13 Nov 2004 16:32:18 -0000 Subject: Lockhart's House and Sorting In-Reply-To: <20041113150820.79850.qmail@web53103.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117776 Hannah: "But surely [Lockhart] wouldn't have been in Gryffindor, being an utter coward." Magda: > There's no reason he couldn't have been a Gryffindor. Pettigrew was > a Gryffindor, after all. The flip side of bravery is bravado - a > false bravery hiding something much less. Maddy: I would also like to add that I think a big part of how you get sorted is what you *value*. ("...choices,Harry... not abilities") So if Lockhart highly *values* bravery, even if he's a coward, he would most likely be sorted into Gryffindor. Judging by the fact that his stories are filled with examples of courage and bravery involved in saving the day, I'd say he values bravery a lot, but just doesn't want (isn't capable of, maybe) to do the dirty work. Also, if Harry valued his own skin more than that of other's, he probably would have been sorted into Slytherin. But because he has his "saving people thing", he's brave and courageous, especially when risking his own neck for someone else. He values bravery and helping other people, and thus, was sorted into Gryffindor. As for Pettigrew...I think that maybe he's never *felt* brave, but *wished* he was, and therefore valued it a lot. (That could account for the fact that he's never described as ever being *equal* to Sirius and James, but rather just *tagging along*) Who knows, maybe in his mind he thought he was brave by helping Voldemort. I'd definitely say cutting off your own hand for someone else is brave, even if the reason for it was despicable. But I think the point of the "choices vs abilities" thing is that it really doesn't matter what House you're sorted into. What matters is *what* you do, not *how*/*what* you are. (I guess that's a bit of a defense for Snape...) =) Maddy (who definitely values courage above a lot of other qualities, but isn't often very brave herself) From nrenka at yahoo.com Sat Nov 13 16:47:38 2004 From: nrenka at yahoo.com (nrenka) Date: Sat, 13 Nov 2004 16:47:38 -0000 Subject: Bad guys and black hats (was Re: Unreliable narrator) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117777 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Renee" wrote: > What would you have done if you hadn't considered Snape a sadistic > teacher, or conversely, if JKR had said he's mostly play-acting? > Would you have rejected her comment like you reject the one about > the conventional black hats? Can you really do this: accept those > authorial comments that confirm your own judgement and > interpretation but reject those that don't? Well, this is how I tend to use her comments, and I'll illustrate using this particular example. Some of Snape's behavior is describable as sadistic from the text itself, being as it is often presented to us that he *enjoys* the distress that he gets to directly or indirect cause other people. This enjoyment can be read in a fairly straightforward manner from descriptions of his behavior, and so forth. (I don't feel the need to give a catalog here, as it's been done before.) However, the 'sadistic' descriptor is dependent upon this enjoyment *actually* being something that Snape is getting out of it. Many a reader has postulated that we are being misled as to Snape's actual enjoyment of this behavior, by means of the unreliable narrator and Harry's mistaken perception of events. It seems to me that this subversive position is ultimately contingent upon a final revelation of intention--a "No, you foolish boy, I did all of that because I really had to, and I didn't like having to do it", or some mutation thereof. I take JKR's own descriptor of Snape as a 'sadistic teacher who abuses his power' as a statement indicating that we are indeed justified in that reading of the text and are not going to find out the contrary. [If, however, she were to state that 'Snape was play- acting all along, and then goes on to show it, even in a subtle manner--that'd be another story.] But I admit to having the bias that, lacking the all-important later qualifications that can completely change how we see things, the more overtly supportable interpretations are the better ones--**for and only for** a situation where we have a distinct pattern of behavior. In other words, for things that aren't a one-off, but something with a number of examples behind it. There are other things where I do think the most overt explanation is probably incomplete/possibly wrong, but that's usually because they're singular incidents (and thus cannot be seriated). And this does not apply to all considerations of Snape's character by *any* means. Authorial statements about character can be useful as potential regulations for predictions. Given her statements about such people as Lucius Malfoy and Dolores Umbridge, I wouldn't put much money on a subversive reading of either of those characters. Pippin is really hoping (methinks) that JKR has been exceedingly sneaky and careful with her statements about Lupin, to set us up for a very big BANG. And there's a lot she won't answer about Snape, so when she gives a certain qualifier/descriptor of behavior that lines up closely with patterns that can be cataloged and fairly easily lifted from the text, I'm inclined to pay attention. -Nora goes to play in the snow and maybe try to write some on the papers From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Sat Nov 13 17:04:45 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Sat, 13 Nov 2004 17:04:45 -0000 Subject: The Slytherins (was : Does Snape really favor Draco?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117778 Lupinlore wrote : "This of course brings up yet a further point about DD and the Slytherins. Up to this point we see no evidence that DD or Snape tries to actively wean them away from the Death Eaters. Now, it can be argued that realistically there is little DD can do he has simply washed his hands of the whole house, viewing them as a lost cause. " Hannah answered : "Discussing things to do with Slytherin house and the treatment of its students is always tricky, because we get such a skewed view of it from canon. I can't believe that every single Slytherin is a Draco Malfoy clone, convinced of their superiority, mean and stupid in the extreme, with DE's for parents. But that is certainly the impression that canon gives at present (oh for the introduction of that 'good' Slytherin!)." Del replies : I've always been uncomfortable with the way Slytherin House is represented throughout the series. Every single bad student is in Slytherin. When a student from another House is not nice, it's only temporary or not that bad. But the Slytherins are all an evil and malicious bunch. Humph >:-( Hannah wrote : " But do Slytherin students really get that great a deal? They are loathed by everybody who isn't one, with the other three houses banding together against them." Del replies : Agreed. The problem is : where can that lead them ? Either they become miserable because of it, or they have to deal with it somehow. They can choose to believe that the other Houses are just jealous, or that they are afraid, or that they are stupid, but they have to find some explanation for it. Nice reasonable people don't just assume that you're bad because you belong to a specific group, right ? So if the rest of the school thinks that the Slytherins are bad just because they are Slytherins, that means the rest of the school is not nice and reasonable. There are bad Slytherins, sure, but that shouldn't justify the way the Slytherins as a House are treated. Hannah wrote : "Why does DD not try (or appear to try) to wean them away from the DE's? For the reasons you gave, that it likely wouldn't work. Obviously there is a general anti-DE message given out to the whole school, but it's a bit like drugs education, I suppose. You can tell children again and again that they're bad, throw tonnes of money at awareness campaigns, but plenty of kids will still take them. " Del replies : Yes, but the official general anti-DE message is countered by the unofficial specific belief that the Slytherins are hopeless and will become DEs anyway. It's like in a school where a minority of the students come from a bad part of the town. The general anti-drug message will be given to everyone, but the general belief will be that most of the kids coming from that bad area will do drugs anyway. They are just bad seeds, they can't be trusted : they'll have to *prove* they can be trusted before other people trust them, contrarily to what would happen for any other student. That's exactly what's happening with the Slytherins : a student from any other House is presumed good until proven bad, while a Slytherin is presumed bad until proven good. And we know that kids have a strong tendency to become precisely what people expect of them. Hannah wrote : "As for DD washing his hands of the whole house, that implies that every single Slytherin is going to become a DE. And even Hagrid doesn't go as far as saying that all Slytherins are dark wizards (just that all dark wizards are Slytherins, which isn't true anyway). I still think it's a significant minority, rather than all or even most of them. A world where 25% people are pure evil is ridiculous, and I don't think JKR would create such a place. And it would make the job of the Aurors much easier - arrest all Slytherins." Del replies : Remember the VWI ? Remember the gang of Slytherins who all became DEs ? Comparatively, how many kids from the other Houses do we know that became DEs ? It *would* have been better if the Aurors had just arrested all the graduating Slytherins. As I said, kids in general tend to become what you expect of them. Expect them to be good, they'll try harder to be good. Expect them to be courageous, they'll try harder to be courageous. Expect them to be bad, lying and deceiving, they won't feel like making any effort to be good. In general. Del From R.Vink2 at chello.nl Sat Nov 13 17:09:37 2004 From: R.Vink2 at chello.nl (Renee) Date: Sat, 13 Nov 2004 17:09:37 -0000 Subject: Bad guys and black hats (was Re: Unreliable narrator) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117779 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "potioncat" wrote: > > Alla wrote: > > > Take Snape, for example. :o) She says that he is sadistic > teacher > > > and not that I had many doubts about that quality of his, but I > > > still thought that maybe he plays at least a little bit. When I > > > hear such quote from the author's mouth, I am fully convinced. > > > > > >>>Renee: > > > What would you have done if you hadn't considered Snape a sadistic > > teacher, or conversely, if JKR had said he's mostly play-acting? > > Would you have rejected her comment like you reject the one about > > the conventional black hats? Can you really do this: accept those > > authorial comments that confirm your own judgement and > > interpretation but reject those that don't? > > > Potioncat: > Did I read this correctly? Has JKR said Snape is acting? Renee: Sorry if I created confusion here! To my best knowledge, JKR never said such a thing. I merely wondered what Alla's reaction would have been it *if* she had - knowing Alla's opinion about Snape. > In JKR's defense, she is being bombarded with questions about > characters. She can hardly refuse to answer. There she is, on the spot, and whether she thought the character was perfectly clear, or whether she intended some confusion on our part, she needs to say > something. Of course, she could refuse to give interviews at all. Renee: I doubt refusing to give interviews is a realistic option, but she can avoid answering certain questions (and sometimes does). Of course she can say whatever she wants, but that doesn't mean I have to accept all her explanations on authority if I don't quite see them in the text. Renee From foxmoth at qnet.com Sat Nov 13 17:19:25 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Sat, 13 Nov 2004 17:19:25 -0000 Subject: =?iso-8859-1?q?Re:_JKR=92s_giant_mistake=3F?= In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117780 > > > > Pippin: > > > > "Red herring" refers to the misleading clue itself. A mistaken belief based on false evidence or faulty reasoning is generally referred to as a superstition. > > > > > > Neri: > > > Aren't you using slightly too strong words? While there is no absolute proof that the bad guys can't say the name Voldemort, canon does seem to suggest it. > > > > Renee: > > I have a problem with the word superstition, with its connotations of irrationality and false religion. Methinks "fallacy" suits Pippin's definition better. << Pippin: I think we agree that canon fosters a belief that bad guys can't say the name. It's only if we accept this belief that the use of the name by various unsavory persons becomes a problem, which is what I wanted to emphasize by using the term superstition. I do not mean to imply that those who do accept it are overly credulous or inclined to reason falsely. Renee: > > That is, it would if we knew for certain the evidence and/or the reasoning were faulty, which I don't think is the case. Even if you can argue that there is an explanation for every instance a bad guy says "Voldemort", this still doesn't constitute evidence that some of these cases weren't oversights. The contradiction between what canon strongly suggests and the use of Voldemort's name by a few particular characters, remains. << Pippin: Mistakes, such as the famous wand order mess, are random and thus as likely to be spectacular as not. An apparent inconsistency which shows signs of having been slipped inconspicuously into innocent chapters, and occurs only in one direction, so that we don't have Dumbledore or Sirius saying "the Dark Lord", smacks of intent rather than coincidence. But I could be wrong. Renee: > > I keep saying we need more information, though I agree with everyone who said that saying "Voldemort" doesn't separate the white sheep from the black.<< Pippin: I think we have all the information we need. Sirius and Lupin who use the name freely, were still suspected of being spies and Death Eaters during VWI. Pettigrew also must have used it before -- at least, Sirius remarks that Pettigrew is now afraid of it, "What, scared to hear your old master's name?" said Black. "I don't blame you Peter. His lot aren't very happy with you, are they?" -PoA ch 19. Peter certainly can't have been possessed for an entire year or he would have died as Quirrell did when Voldemort abandoned him. In fact, Sirius uses the name for several pages before Harry "at long last" decides to believe him. So even Harry doesn't think this is something he can rely on entirely, though it doubtless helped to convince him. > barmaid tries again to enter this thread: > > I will pose my question from further up this thread here again. When did people stop saying the name and why? It seems likely that there was a time when it was widely spoken -- it is certainly widely known - - so when and how did this name taboo come in to play.< Pippin I think it is analogous to the name of G-d in the Hebrew scriptures, which the pious may write but not speak. Hagrid isn't afraid to write the name down, only insecure about how to spell it. Tom himself reveals his name first by writing it in magical letters. Pippin From R.Vink2 at chello.nl Sat Nov 13 17:42:38 2004 From: R.Vink2 at chello.nl (Renee) Date: Sat, 13 Nov 2004 17:42:38 -0000 Subject: Bad guys and black hats (was Re: Unreliable narrator) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117781 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "nrenka" wrote: > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Renee" wrote: > > Renee: > > >Can you really do this: accept those > > authorial comments that confirm your own judgement and > > interpretation but reject those that don't? > Nora: >Well, this is how I tend to use her comments > I take JKR's own descriptor of Snape as a 'sadistic teacher who > abuses his power' as a statement indicating that we are indeed > justified in that reading of the text and are not going to find out > the contrary. [If, however, she were to state that 'Snape was play- acting all along, and then goes on to show it, even in a subtle manner--that'd be another story.] Renee: Actually, I don't disagree - I was merely using Alla's example, which happened to be Snape. Nora: > Authorial statements about character can be useful as potential > regulations for predictions. Renee: If this is the same thing as what I called "clues" in a previous post, I agree. But that such statements are valuable as predictions doesn't automatically mean they're 100% valid as assessments of the text we've got so far. What JKR is trying to say isn't necessarily identical with what she's actually saying, though of course the final verdict will have to wait until after Book 7. Nora: > Given her statements about such people > as Lucius Malfoy and Dolores Umbridge, I wouldn't put much money on a subversive reading of either of those characters. Pippin is really hoping (methinks) that JKR has been exceedingly sneaky and careful with her statements about Lupin, to set us up for a very big BANG. Renee: It probably won't come as a big surprise that I'm of a different opinion... Calling Lupin a "great man" and saying he's one of the characters she loves (along with HRH, DD and Hagrid), doesn't strike me as particularly sneaky and careful. If I don't believe in ESE! Lupin, it's partly because I believe these statements give us a clue about JKR's intentions with this character, and not because I personally think Lupin is such a great man; so far, he's been too flawed to qualify. Renee From madettebeau at gmail.com Sat Nov 13 17:55:41 2004 From: madettebeau at gmail.com (madlysarcastic) Date: Sat, 13 Nov 2004 17:55:41 -0000 Subject: Is Dudley...slow? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117782 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "ericoppen" wrote: > I've sometimes wondered if a lot of Petunia's attitudes couldn't be > explained by saying that Dudley's...slow of wit. What I think is now > called a "special-needs child", although the PC authorities may have > come up with fresh euphemisms. Maddy says: I don't think he is mentally defficient. He's not the brightest bulb in the box, but I don't think it's anything serious. I think because his parents spoil him, give him everything he wants, whenever he wants it, make excuses for him, are unable to see anything he does as wrong, or unacceptable and always think well of him no matter what he does, nothing he ever says or does is challenged. His parents don't try to challenge his way of thinking, his behaviour or ever challenge him intellectually. I sometimes think that those we believe are "intelligent" are that way because they've spent much of their lives thinking, asking questions, or have been encouraged to think and ask questions. And the Dursley's haven't done either with Dudley. What ever Dudely wants, goes. They tend give him whatever makes him happy, not what is for his own good. Making him read a book once in a while, instead of watching tv would probably be for his own good, but Petunia and Dursley would never do such a thing, unless the need was very dire. Such was the case with Dudley's diet. It was an unavoidable fact that there weren't uniforms his size at Smeltings, so they couldn't ignore the fact that Dudley was overweight unless they were to have him switch schools or something. I think his parents' attitude of letting him do whatever he wants is what makes him feel like he doesn't have to do math problems, or whatever a school assignment may be, and what makes him feel like it's perfectly alright to bully and beat up other children. Take for instance, in PS/SS when he's struggling to figure out how many birthday presents he's got: (from page 21, PS, Bloomsbury/Raincoast) 'And we'll buy you two presents while we're out today. How's that, popkin? Two more presents. Is that alright?' Dudley thought for a moment. It looked like hard work. Finally he said slowly, "So I'll have thirty ... thirty ...' 'Thirty-nine, sweetums,' said Aunt Petunia. 'Oh.' Dudley sat down heavily and grabbed the nearest parcel. 'All right then.' --- Petunia doesn't encourage him to figure it out for himself, but provides the answer for him so he doesn't have to work it out. For someone who's struggling in math, it's better to show them *how* to arrive at the correct answer, rather than just telling them how to do it. It looks like "hard work" because he's out of practice. He's probably not forced to do math problems very often, so he's not used to them, and doesn't have a good idea of how to go about them, even a simple one. So I think Dudley, like most people, has the potential to be intelligent, but has always been given everything he wants, including excuses not to work hard at school, or develop his intelligence. Although, that does not explain *why* the Dursleys are so intent on spoiling their son rotten. =) Maddy From meriaugust at yahoo.com Sat Nov 13 18:09:07 2004 From: meriaugust at yahoo.com (meriaugust) Date: Sat, 13 Nov 2004 18:09:07 -0000 Subject: Did DD lie about the Prophecy ? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117783 Del wrote: > First, let's examine what we believe about the circumstances > surrounding the first prophecy. > - It was delivered months before it would come true. > - It was delivered when Trelawney was talking to DD in the middle of a > crowded pub. > - It was delivered to DD. Meri now: I agree with numbers one and three, but IIRC the interview between DD and Trelawny was taking place in a room Trelawny rented above the bar at the Hog's Head. And this makes a little more sense, because a crowded bar is not the best place for a job interview, even one DD isn't planning to take that seriously. Meri From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Sat Nov 13 18:29:24 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Sat, 13 Nov 2004 18:29:24 -0000 Subject: Did DD lie about the Prophecy ? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117784 Meri wrote : " IIRC the interview between DD and Trelawny was taking place in a room Trelawny rented above the bar at the Hog's Head. And this makes a little more sense, because a crowded bar is not the best place for a job interview, even one DD isn't planning to take that seriously. " Del replies : You mean that the interview took place in the very bedroom Trelawney rented ? Could be. I'd never imagined it that way, but it could be. That still wouldn't explain : - why DD didn't make Trelawney come to his office. A bedroom is not the best place for a job interview either. - how they could have been overheard. I'm not saying it's impossible, I'm just saying that it's even more improbable than I previously thought. It would almost mean that whoever overheard them was actually spying on them. Which brings even more questions to my mind : - Who was the spy sying on ? DD or Trelawney ? Why would anyone spy on Trelawney ? - Didn't whoever was being spied on know they were being spied on ? In that case, why make the interview in a place where they could so easily be overheard ? Once again : why not do it in DD's office ? Questions, questions, ever more questions !! Del From foxmoth at qnet.com Sat Nov 13 18:35:52 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Sat, 13 Nov 2004 18:35:52 -0000 Subject: Bad guys and black hats (was Re: Unreliable narrator) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117785 > Nora: > > Given her statements about such people > > as Lucius Malfoy and Dolores Umbridge, I wouldn't put much money on a subversive reading of either of those characters. Pippin is really hoping (methinks) that JKR has been exceedingly sneaky and careful with her statements about Lupin, to set us up for a very big BANG. > > Renee: > It probably won't come as a big surprise that I'm of a different > opinion... Calling Lupin a "great man" and saying he's one of the characters she loves (along with HRH, DD and Hagrid), doesn't strike me as particularly sneaky and careful.< >If I don't believe in ESE! Lupin, it's partly because I believe these statements give us a clue about JKR's intentions with this character, and not because I personally think Lupin is such a great man; so far, he's been too flawed to qualify.< Pippin: "After all, He Who Must Not Be Named did great things -- terrible, yes, but great."--PS/SS ch 5 "Not Slytherin, eh?" said the small voice. "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 -- no? Well, if you're sure -- better be GRYFFINDOR!" --PS/SS ch 7 http://www.quick-quote-quill.org/articles/2000/1000-livechat-aol.h tml Ms. Rowling, which character besides Harry is your favorite, and why? I think that would have to be Hagrid -- but I love Ron and Hermione too, and I also love writing characters like Gilderoy Lockhart, Snape, the Dursleys... it's such fun doing horrible things to them. Will we be seeing Lupin anytime soon? Yes, Harry will be seeing Lupin again. He's another of my favourite characters. http://www.quick-quote-quill.org/articles/2000/1000-cbc-rogers.ht m Rowling: Mm hmm. I know exactly what's going to be in five, six and seven. And when I've finished that, then we can have the full and frank discussion, but until then, if I give full and frank answers I'm giving away things about the plot, so I don't want to do that. --- That sounds to me like JKR admitting she isn't giving frank answers till Book Seven is on the racks, but I'm sure somebody will be able to explain that this wasn't what she meant to say at all ;-) Pippin From willsonkmom at msn.com Sat Nov 13 18:40:04 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Sat, 13 Nov 2004 18:40:04 -0000 Subject: Did DD lie about the Prophecy ? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117786 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "delwynmarch" wrote: > > Meri wrote : > " IIRC the interview between DD and Trelawny was taking place in a > room Trelawny rented above the bar at the Hog's Head. And this makes a > little more sense, because a crowded bar is not the best place for a > job interview, even one DD isn't planning to take that seriously. " > > Del replies : > You mean that the interview took place in the very bedroom Trelawney > rented ? Could be. I'd never imagined it that way, but it could be. Potioncat: I would think more a sitting room. Or a room intended for a meeting. Why he didn't meet her in his office is a good question. Unless he had already declined to meet with her and at her insistence agreed to come to the Hogshead. Del: > That still wouldn't explain : > - how they could have been overheard. I'm not saying it's impossible, > I'm just saying that it's even more improbable than I previously > thought. It would almost mean that whoever overheard them was actually > spying on them. Potioncat: I think DD is very vague as to who was listening. The bartender could have seen a rat running along the hall, picked it up by its tail and tossed it out the window. And DD could have put that together later. Or a drunk may have been kicked out that DD later realised had been listening and only pretending to be drunk. Although it sounds as if a person was caught in the act, it may not have been that at all. Del: Which brings even more questions to my mind : > - Who was the spy sying on ? DD or Trelawney ? Why would anyone spy on > Trelawney ? > - Didn't whoever was being spied on know they were being spied on ? In > that case, why make the interview in a place where they could so > easily be overheard ? Once again : why not do it in DD's office ? Potioncat: But, if there were other prophecies, and if a certain evil overlord was anticipating more to come...someone could have been assigned to listen out. Potioncat: Who suddenly imagines TT twins with their extendable ears listening... > > Questions, questions, ever more questions !! > > Del From chnc1024 at AOL.COM Sat Nov 13 18:51:07 2004 From: chnc1024 at AOL.COM (chnc1024 at AOL.COM) Date: Sat, 13 Nov 2004 13:51:07 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Is Dudley...slow? Message-ID: <62.47e9647f.2ec7b19b@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 117787 In a message dated 11/13/2004 9:58:12 AM Pacific Standard Time, madettebeau at gmail.com writes: Maddy says: I don't think he is mentally defficient. He's not the brightest bulb in the box, but I don't think it's anything serious. I think because his parents spoil him, give him everything he wants, whenever he wants it, make excuses for him, are unable to see anything he does as wrong, or unacceptable and always think well of him no matter what he does, nothing he ever says or does is challenged. His parents don't try to challenge his way of thinking, his behaviour or ever challenge him intellectually. I sometimes think that those we believe are "intelligent" are that way because they've spent much of their lives thinking, asking questions, or have been encouraged to think and ask questions. And the Dursley's haven't done either with Dudley. What ever Dudely wants, goes. Chancie: I agree! I don't think Dudley is really slow, I think he just tested his boundaries at a young age and found out they moved quite easily. I'm sad to say that I have seen something VERY close to a real life Dudley in my little cousin. >From the time she was little (like 1 year old) her parents would take her to Mc Donald's to get a happy meal for dinner because "she won't eat what we're cooking for dinner" when she was never even made to try it in the first place. She's now 10 years old 4' 1" weighs 170lbs and can't (or won't rather) dress herself, tie her shoes or a number of other things a child should learn to do at 5. She's not a stupid or slow girl, she's actually quite smart. She knows how to get what she wants and does it. She knows all she has to do is whine and tell mommy I can't do my homework its' too hard, and mommy does it for her. I would imagine Dudley was the same way and Eventually he learned to be stupid because he wasn't challenged. Chancie~who wonders how Petunia and Vernon will feel when they are approaching their 80's and Dudley still lives at home playing video games and still expects to be waited on hand and foot. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From foxmoth at qnet.com Sat Nov 13 18:54:33 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Sat, 13 Nov 2004 18:54:33 -0000 Subject: Did DD lie about the Prophecy ? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117788 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "delwynmarch" wrote: ? After all, *why* would he have interviewed > Trelawney there ? She had taken a room at the pub, granted, but I would expect that she would have gone up to the castle, to DD's office, for her interview. That's the way things happen usually : applicants come to the boss's office. < Dumbledore says he went to see her out of "common politeness" on a cold, wet night. Sybill is very sensitive to cold -- it's always stiflingly hot in her chambers, the fire blazes away even in the middle of June, and nonetheless, she's always draped in shawls. Perhaps Dumbledore courteously agreed to meet at the Hogs Head to spare her a strenuous journey which he feared would only end in disappointment. The upstairs room needn't have been a bedchamber -- many inns have parlors upstairs for the convenience of guests who need a private meeting place and don't wish to entertain in their rooms. Pippin From staceymateo at gmail.com Sat Nov 13 16:08:42 2004 From: staceymateo at gmail.com (staceymateo) Date: Sat, 13 Nov 2004 16:08:42 -0000 Subject: JKRs giant mistake? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117789 Pippin: > "Red herring" refers to the misleading clue itself. A mistaken belief based on false evidence or faulty reasoning is generally referred to as a superstition. Renee: > I have a problem with the word superstition, with its connotations of irrationality and false religion. Methinks "fallacy" suits Pippin's definition better. > I keep saying we need more information, though I agree with everyone who said that saying "Voldemort" doesn't separate the white sheep from the black. barmaid tries again to enter this thread: > It seems to me that the DE's do not say the name because of fear yes, but also a certain kind of respect, almost love or awe or religious devotion to the Dark Lord. The name by itself, especially without the "Lord" in front of it sounds too familiar or informal -- disrespectful. These people, the DE's have banked everything on the idea that LV is "the one". To casually use his name minimizes his power, which is exactly why DD wants people to use it. > I will pose my question from further up this thread here again. When did people stop saying the name and why? It seems likely that there was a time when it was widely spoken -- it is certainly widely known - so when and how did this name taboo come in to play. > I personally use the word superstition all the time whenever someone (usually me) confuses coincidence with cause and effect. I find it to be a particularly useful concept in dealing with computer problems. I think it could be appropriate to this name issue as well. Stacey here: When I first noticed in PS/SS that Hagrid wouldn't easily say "Voldemort" and then when Harry does in front of someone (Ron, Hagrid? I don't have SS to refer to) and gets told to say "He-who- must-not-be-named" it reminded me of people and cancer. There are still older people who refer to cancer and whisper it when discussing it. The purpose of the whispering that if you can't be heard discussing it, it can't affect you. It is driven by fear. Even with Voldemort "gone" for 11 years, people still remember their fear of him so clearly that they can't say the name. As far as the DE's referring to him as the "Dark Lord", I see that as a show of respect. Also, if I remember correctly JKR herself has stated that Voldemort should be referred to as Voldemort (not Voldie etc.)in fan discussions, as it is disrespectful to refer to him otherwise... DD refers to Voldemort not only as "Voldemort" but as Tom as well. I think that DD refers to Voldemort as Tom to remind himself and Voldemort that he truly is only Tom Riddle and always will be Tom Riddle. Kinda like Luke refering to Darth Vader as "Father" to remind him that he used to be Anakin Skywalker and always will be (and is at the end of Return of the Jedi) no matter how "evil" he is. I found Superstition defined as the 1)A belief, practice, or rite irrationally maintained by ignorance of the laws of nature or by faith in magic or chance. 2)A fearful or abject state of mind resulting from such ignorance or irrationality. 3)Idolatry. Based on these definitions, the not-speaking of Voldemort's name is a superstition. Definitions 1 & 2 speak to the general WW and #3 speaks to the DE's. The WW is still so afraid of Voldemort they cling to the superstition that something will happen if they speak it and the DE's are too "pious" to dare speak their lord's name. Just my input. Feel free to agree or disagree. :) Stacey From bob.oliver at cox.net Sat Nov 13 16:08:56 2004 From: bob.oliver at cox.net (lupinlore) Date: Sat, 13 Nov 2004 16:08:56 -0000 Subject: Why did the founders retain Slytherin's house? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117790 Lets delve a little into that ever-popular topic, Slytherin House. We know that Salazar departed in a huff when the other founders didn't agree with his pureblood policies. Why then, did the other founders allow his House to remain part of Hogwarts. Here are a few possible reasons. They aren't necessarily exclusive, so a combination of several of them is possible: 1) Because of tradition. The world of circa 1000 A.D. was a very tradition bound place, and the founders thought it best to allow the original house system to remain in place even after Salazar fled. To do otherwise would have encouraged questions about the other Houses or the House system as a whole. 2) Because they genuinely felt that cunning and ambition were important traits and needed to be represented in the House system. 3) Political realism. They realized that many of the beliefs Salazar espoused were widely held in the wizarding world, and that, like it or not, they had to allow them to be represented at Hogwarts if they wanted their school to succeed. 4) Administrative convenience. The school was easier to govern with four houses rather than three. 5) The most interesting possibility, as flypaper for Dark Wizards and racists. They may have realized/expected that most students with Dark tendencies would end up in Slytherin. By allowing the House to continue they insured such students would be easy to spot and observe. Similarly, they probably realized that pureblood theorists would tend to find their way into Slytherin, and could be contained and observed as well. This would predicate a certain cold- bloodedness on the founders' part, as it would mean that the Slytherin kids were deliberately placed in a House pretty much guaranteed to play to their weaknesses and worst qualities. In effect, they would be abandoning a certain number of individuals for the sake of guarding/forewarning against the rise of Dark Wizards and racists. Lupinlore From TheMuffinMan0311 at comcast.net Sat Nov 13 16:14:29 2004 From: TheMuffinMan0311 at comcast.net (TheMuffinMan0311 at comcast.net) Date: Sat, 13 Nov 2004 16:14:29 +0000 Subject: Harry taking credit for what he didnt do... Message-ID: <111320041614.8460.419632E4000986210000210C2200750330CECECCCF020E03020700009A030A089B@comcast.net> No: HPFGUIDX 117791 Alla: > Huh? Could you explain please "had to be saved by Dumbledore"/ Sure, > Harry is not ready to completely win over Voldie yet, but he saved > himself when Voldemort possesed him. > > "It is the powerheld within that room that you possess in such > quantities and which Voldemort has not at all. The power took you to > save Sirius tonight. That power also saved you from possession by > Voldemort, because he could not bear to reside ina body so full of > the force he detest. In the end, it mattered not that you could nto > close your mind. It was your heart that saved you" - OOP, paperback, > p.844. > > Harry screwed up enough that night, but he did not take credit for > what he did not do. In response to your comment on him saving himself when possesed, Yes I agree that DD Couldnt possibly have saved Harry from his possesion, BUT Harry didnt save himself either! In the sence that he did it on purpose! Harry didnt say: "Ok, I'm possesed here, ok I need to clear my mind and that will get him out, Yes that's what I'll do..." All Harry did was think about how he was going to die! He saved himself by luck! Even if you say he has the reason to gloat about this feat, yes he did not get killed, but he still shouldn't make it as if he won some heroic battle! THAT is my point here. TheMuffinMan From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Sat Nov 13 19:17:05 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Sat, 13 Nov 2004 19:17:05 -0000 Subject: Bad guys and black hats (was Re: Unreliable narrator) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117792 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "pippin_999" wrote: > > http://www.quick-quote-quill.org/articles/2000/1000-cbc-rogers.ht > m > > Rowling: Mm hmm. I know exactly what's going to be in five, six > and seven. And when I've finished that, then we can have the full > and frank discussion, but until then, if I give full and frank > answers I'm giving away things about the plot, so I don't want to > do that. > --- > > That sounds to me like JKR admitting she isn't giving frank > answers till Book Seven is on the racks, but I'm sure somebody > will be able to explain that this wasn't what she meant to say at > all ;-) > Alla: Ummmm, of course not, Pippin. But could you please give me ONE example when she was caught in LYING while answering. Definitely, she is hiding things and covering tracks, but I am not sure about that kind of sneakiness, which you are implying. :o) By the way, you frogot about this quote: Who is your favourite character? I love: Harry, Hermione, Ron, Hagrid, Dumbledore, Ginny, Fred, George and Lupin. I love writing (though would not necessarily want to meet) Snape. My favourite new character is Luna Lovegood. --------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------- - from the website Alla From mysticowl at gmail.com Sat Nov 13 19:19:09 2004 From: mysticowl at gmail.com (Alina) Date: Sat, 13 Nov 2004 14:19:09 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Did DD lie about the Prophecy ? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117793 Del wrote: (big snippage) > 2. In the second case, the Prophecy is delivered only to a specific > recipient. In the first one, it is delivered to (potentially) a whole > room of people. Trelawney could have given her second prophecy during > class, for example. But no, she waited for her *only* opportunity to > see Harry in private. Inversely, she supposedly delivered her first > prophecy in circumstances where other people could overhear her. So > I'm wondering : did DD outright lie when he pretended the prophecy was > given in the Hog's head ? After all, *why* would he have interviewed > Trelawney there ? She had taken a room at the pub, granted, but I > would expect that she would have gone up to the castle, to DD's > office, for her interview. That's the way things happen usually : > applicants come to the boss's office. *Especially* when the boss is > not interested in filling the post to start with : DD said he didn't > intend to continue the Divination class. So why would he go all the > way to Hogsmeade to meet a potential applicant, instead of having her > come to her office ? Or did he also lie about the reason he was > meeting her in the first place ? Did he not want some people to know > that he was meeting Trelawney ? Or maybe he never met her to start > with, and he was never the one the prophecy was delivered to. Which > brings me to my third point : I myself have always invisioned DD interviewing Trelawny in the room she rented, I'm not sure why, I guess it's not mentioned in the text, but I imagined the interview in the room and the person who overheard them listening at the keyhole. As for why DD would interview her there as opposed to Hogwarts, it actually makes sense to me. This is before Voldemort's downfall, so I'm pretty sure DD would keep the school grounds closed to anyone but staff and students in order to keep the students as safe as possible. Alina. From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Sat Nov 13 19:19:54 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Sat, 13 Nov 2004 19:19:54 -0000 Subject: Harry taking credit for what he didnt do... In-Reply-To: <111320041614.8460.419632E4000986210000210C2200750330CECECCCF020E03020700009A030A089B@comcast.net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117794 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, TheMuffinMan0311 at c... wrote: snip. > All Harry did was think about how he was going to die! He saved himself by luck! Even if you say he has the reason to gloat about this feat, yes he did not get killed, but he still shouldn't make it as if he won some heroic battle! THAT is my point here. > Alla: I don't think Harry was gloating in the first place. He was making an assesment on exactly how dangerous to him he considers Malfoy to be. I think he had every right to make such assesment and I think it was a very correct one. And we have to agree to disagree on "being saved by luck" thing. From staceymateo at gmail.com Sat Nov 13 16:51:09 2004 From: staceymateo at gmail.com (staceymateo) Date: Sat, 13 Nov 2004 16:51:09 -0000 Subject: Did DD lie about the Prophecy ? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117795 delwynmarch wrote: > ....let's examine what we believe about the circumstances surrounding the first prophecy. > It was delivered months before it would come true. > - It was delivered when Trelawney was talking to DD in the middle of a crowded pub. > - It was delivered to DD. > Now, let's see about the second prophecy. It was delivered : > - on the afternoon of the day things would happen > - when Harry and Trelawney were alone > - to Harry alone > > We don't know anything about how the Seer gift works. Because of that, > we don't know what kinds of conditions it works under, if any. How > practical ! But let's assume that it doesn't just work at random, and > that some kinds of conditions must be met. In that case, the major > differences between the circumstances in which the two prophecies were > given strike me as suspicious. Stacey: I don't think that Sybil could "choose" when the prophecies went, but they came out when she saw them. The fact that she could not remember what she had said to Harry after the delivery of the 2nd prophecy leads me to this conclusion. If she was waiting to deliver it to the person it belonged to, she would have known about it in advance, and would have been premediated in her presentation even. That scene in PoA makes it look like she has no control over when the visions take over and it isn't even her conveying them. If Ron or Hermione or whoever would have been in the room at the time with Harry, they would have heard the 2nd prophecy as well. I do think that the timing of the delivery has alot to do with someone involved in the overall prophecy itself. The 2nd prophecy had nothing directly to do with Harry, just his actions. The 1st prophecy had nothing to do with DD himself, but I think we all agree that his actions play a large part in the outcome of the prophecy itself. > 1. In the second case, the prophecy was given just before it happened. > In the first case, it is supposed to have been given several weeks > before. But is this true ? Could it be that the prophecy was given on > the very day Harry was born ? After all, it would make sense that DD > would be interviewing an applicant to a teaching post in the middle of > the holidays. Stacey: If the prophecy had been given the day Harry was born, that would have given DD a little more information that the prophecy was about Harry to begin with and he told Harry that when the prophecy was delivered it could have been either Harry or Neville that fit the definition of the "one with the power to defeat the dark lord". Instead DD told Harry that he wasn't sure that it was about Harry until after Halloween Night 1981. > > 2. In the second case, the Prophecy is delivered only to a specific > recipient. In the first one, it is delivered to (potentially) a whole > room of people. Trelawney could have given her second prophecy during > class, for example. But no, she waited for her *only* opportunity to > see Harry in private. Inversely, she supposedly delivered her first > prophecy in circumstances where other people could overhear her. So > I'm wondering : did DD outright lie when he pretended the prophecy was > given in the Hog's head ? After all, *why* would he have interviewed > Trelawney there ? She had taken a room at the pub, granted, but I > would expect that she would have gone up to the castle, to DD's > office, for her interview. That's the way things happen usually : > applicants come to the boss's office. *Especially* when the boss is > not interested in filling the post to start with : DD said he didn't > intend to continue the Divination class. So why would he go all the > way to Hogsmeade to meet a potential applicant, instead of having her > come to her office ? Or did he also lie about the reason he was > meeting her in the first place ? Did he not want some people to know > that he was meeting Trelawney ? Or maybe he never met her to start > with, and he was never the one the prophecy was delivered to. Stacey: If I remember correctly, DD stated that he didn't want to continue Divination and only consented to talk to Trelawney as she was related to Cassandra Trelawney, someone he considered a "true" seer. The Hog's head, to me, seems easy. He went to "interview" someone who he had no intention of hiring at a place that his brother was the bartender (JKR's reference of the goat smell and confirmation that several fans guessed correctly make the bartender DD's brother). The fact that she had a vision while with him made him decide that she was a "true" seer and kept her close, my guess is to protect her as she had just predicted the possible/probable defeat of Voldemort. >Which > brings me to my third point : > > 3. In the second case, the prophecy was given to the person who would > be instrumental in making it happen : Harry is the only person really > responsible for making the prophecy come true. Without Harry's plea to > spare Peter's life, Sirius and Remus would have killed Peter, and the > prophecy would never have become true. Of course, other factors > contributed to it, like Remus forgetting to take his potion and > transforming at a most inappropriate time, or Snape failing to make > himself useful, but those were failures to do better, not conscious > decisions to change the course of events. Only Harry did that : only > Harry forced the course of events to change. Stacey: Remember, when the 2nd prophecy was delivered to Harry, he was still under the impression that Sirius was the one to bring Voldemort back. Then once Peter was determined to be the "bad guy", Harry's sense of justice and fairness and need to not have Sirius return to Azkaban made him want to lock Peter up and this would still make the prophecy false. Then of course, things got a little crazy... Harry's decision wasn't the only reason the 2nd prophecy came true, but a large part of it. Stacey From eggplant9998 at yahoo.com Sat Nov 13 16:56:25 2004 From: eggplant9998 at yahoo.com (eggplant9998) Date: Sat, 13 Nov 2004 16:56:25 -0000 Subject: Why has DD never suggested Snape thank Harry? (Was: Why has DD never suggest In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117796 "dumbledore11214" wrote: > The only possible mitigating circumstance > which I may see for Snape is that we don't > know when exactly he emerged from stairs. Even if you're correct I don't think that mitigates Snape's crime in the slightest; to start punishing a person before you have any clear idea about what really happened or even give the accused two minutes to explain his side of things is not justice. But I don't think you're correct, I don't think Snape cared one bit if Harry really broke a school rule or not, he just found an excuse to make Harry suffer some more so he exploited it as far as he could. potioncat" Wrote: > McGonagall "assumed" that Harry had > tricked Draco into wandering around > the castle at night by telling a wild > story about a dragon. McGonagall > jumped all over Harry Yes and that is not to McGonagall credit, but that was an isolated incident not a general pattern of behavior, and at least she didn't do it just hours after Harry had saved the world yet again, and witnessed the murder of his beloved Godfather, and suffered physical pain so horrible he wanted to die, and was already in a deep depression. Eggplant From kgpopp at yahoo.com Sat Nov 13 17:10:37 2004 From: kgpopp at yahoo.com (kgpopp) Date: Sat, 13 Nov 2004 17:10:37 -0000 Subject: DU treatment of Trelawney In-Reply-To: <20041113044745.2682.qmail@web53101.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117797 Kathleen Hunt wrote: > > I'm sorry if this has been covered in the past, but > > I would like to know if any of you have a theory on > > why Umbridge hated and picked on Trelawney? Trelawney > > mentioned that Seers have been persecuted for years, > > but why? Was Trelawney considered part human because > > of her gift? I would say no, but I don't understand > > why DU went after her. Please let me know. > Juli: > I think the reason DU picked on Trelawney was > that she's a bad teacher, I mean she can't see the > future even if her life depended on it, sure she's > made 2 real prophecies, but I doubt DU knew anything > about them. Kristen: I also agree that DU though Trelawney was a bad teacher. But more to the point Trelawney was an easy target. DU was on a power trip, so I think her motive was to get rid of people that were close to DD to make it easier for her to have Hogwarts under her control. Since DD had hired Trelawney DU wanted to replace Trelawney with a teacher that supported her onw agendaand the MOM. Note: She wanted to get rid of anyone close to DD. McGonagall, Hagrid, and even Snape. Hagrid and Trelawney were easy target becuase they we the least experianced teacher. McGonagall and Snape were trickery as they were competent teachers. (I know not every one likes Snape don't kill me for that statement. I just mean that he really does not potions even if he is not the nicest person or uses the best methods for teaching). If DU attacked them without good cause her attempts to control Howgarts for the MOM would be too obvious. Kristen From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Sat Nov 13 19:31:40 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Sat, 13 Nov 2004 19:31:40 -0000 Subject: Why has DD never suggested Snape thank Harry? (Was: Why has DD never suggest In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117798 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "eggplant9998" : > Even if you're correct I don't think that mitigates > Snape's crime in the slightest; to start punishing > a person before you have any clear idea about what > really happened or even give the accused two > minutes to explain his side of things is not > justice. But I don't think you're correct, > I don't think Snape cared one bit if Harry > really broke a school rule or not, he just > found an excuse to make Harry suffer some more > so he exploited it as far as he could. Alla: I am ALL for bashing what Snape does to Harry (I find it inexcusable 95% of the time), but could we at least have HIS guilt proven, before we do that? :) If Snape did not witness the beginning of the conversation, he was not committing any crime, IMO, he was doing his job as a teacher ( Not that I think that he is doing a very good one :o). I agree with you that Snape often finds an excuse to make Harry suffer, I am just not sure if this is the case. It very well could be, I just don't think we have sufficient evidence yet. From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Sat Nov 13 19:59:08 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Sat, 13 Nov 2004 19:59:08 -0000 Subject: Why did the founders retain Slytherin's house? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117799 Lupinlore wrote: "We know that Salazar departed in a huff when the other founders didn't agree with his pureblood policies. Why then, did the other founders allow his House to remain part of Hogwarts." (snip) " 5) The most interesting possibility, as flypaper for Dark Wizards and racists. They may have realized/expected that most students with > Dark tendencies would end up in Slytherin. By allowing the House to > continue they insured such students would be easy to spot and > observe." Del replies : Interesting. However, we then have to ask : what did they intend to do with those students, once spotted ? It's all very nice to spot the troublesome bad seeds, but it's quite stupid to then allow them to take root and develop. Unless they intended to *do* something to/with those Slytherins, I see no point in setting them apart. I have a sixth option : they couldn't do away with Slytherin House because of some magical contract they had all agreed on when founding the school. The 4 Houses were the 4 pillars of the school : either you keep them all, or you destroy them all (and the school with it), but you can't destroy only one. This would open interesting theories for the future : will some of the kids put an end to the flawed House system of Hogwarts, and rebuild the school on another system (or another set of Houses) ? I somehow doubt it, but that would give a nice bit of work to do to people like Hermione. Del From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Sat Nov 13 20:10:18 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Sat, 13 Nov 2004 20:10:18 -0000 Subject: Did DD lie about the Prophecy ? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117800 Stacey wrote : "I don't think that Sybil could "choose" when the prophecies went, but they came out when she saw them. (snip) That scene in PoA makes it look like she has no control over when the visions take over and it isn't even her conveying them. If Ron or Hermione or whoever would have been in the room at the time with Harry, they would have heard the 2nd prophecy as well. " Del replies : I did point to that problem in my first post : we just don't know how the Seer gift works. It could be totally random, or it could be dependent upon very strict conditions, and everything in between. Consider the Parseltongue gift for example : Harry can only speak Parseltongue when he's speaking to a snake, or trying very hard to imagine that he's speaking to a snake. So maybe Sybil does indeed happen to receive inspirations randomly, in any time or place. But maybe a precise set of very specific conditions has to be fulfilled before she can prophesy. We just don't know. Del From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Sat Nov 13 20:41:05 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Sat, 13 Nov 2004 20:41:05 -0000 Subject: Why did the founders retain Slytherin's house? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117802 > Lupinlore: > snip. > > > 5) The most interesting possibility, as flypaper for Dark Wizards and racists. They may have realized/expected that most students with Dark tendencies would end up in Slytherin. By allowing the House to continue they insured such students would be easy to spot and observe. > Alla: This theory sounds interesting and plausible to me, but I sincerely hope that it will some kind of mix between four others you named , but not this one. It would mean more than certain coldbloodeness on the Founders part. It would mean that for ages ahead they decided to gave up on all kids , who MAY become racists pureblood theorists. It would mean that after the age of eleven such kids don't deserve to be saved. And I really really don't want that to be the case. Slytherin House is the house of racists now, IMO, but I hope that we will see that it does not consists ONLY of racists at the end of the books. From foxmoth at qnet.com Sat Nov 13 20:41:46 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Sat, 13 Nov 2004 20:41:46 -0000 Subject: Bad guys and black hats (was Re: Unreliable narrator) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117803 http://www.quick-quote-quill.org/articles/2000/1000-cbc-rogers.ht > > m > > > > Rowling: Mm hmm. I know exactly what's going to be in five, six and seven. And when I've finished that, then we can have the full and frank discussion, but until then, if I give full and frank answers I'm giving away things about the plot, so I don't want to do that. > > --- > > > > That sounds to me like JKR admitting she isn't giving frank answers till Book Seven is on the racks, but I'm sure somebody will be able to explain that this wasn't what she meant to say at all ;-)<< > > > > Alla: > > Ummmm, of course not, Pippin. But could you please give me ONE example when she was caught in LYING while answering. > > Definitely, she is hiding things and covering tracks, but I am not > sure about that kind of sneakiness, which you are implying. :o) Pippin: What other kind of sneakiness is there? I assume she is hiding things the same way that Dumbledore and Dobby do -- by saying things which are not demonstrably false but aren't "full and frank" either and allowing people to draw false conclusions from limited information.She has secrets to keep until Book Seven. Why should she uncover her tracks before then? She's said there are some surprises coming, but she's also said that Book Five had to be so long because she wanted people to be able to guess what's coming if they kept their wits about them. Most of what makes Book Five so looong is Harry's repeated confrontations with Umbridge. They aren't just there to show us what a despicable creature she is, they've got some other purpose...like maybe showing us what it's like to be Remus Lupin and have the Umbridges of the WW on your case 24/7. See, we think Slytherin House is the racist house. The sad truth is they're *all* racist. How many House Elves are going to school at Hogwarts? Merchildren? Goblins? I thought so. Would Lupin fight fire with fire? He was ready to, with Peter. Maybe Jo can't like the villains -- but she keeps saying she does. IIRC, the only ones she's ever said she doesn't like are Vernon and Umbridge. For example in the Edinburgh transcript at the website, she says that she loves Rita, that she quite likes Rita, no "as a character" qualifiers and then she says that Rita is "loathsome -- morally horrible." Alla: > By the way, you frogot about this quote: > > > Who is your favourite character? > I love: Harry, Hermione, Ron, Hagrid, Dumbledore, Ginny, Fred, > George and Lupin. I love writing (though would not necessarily want to meet) Snape. My favourite new character is Luna Lovegood. Pippin: Hmmm...which section is that from? -- this is from the Edinburgh transcript in the News section: I have loads of favourite characters. I really like writing 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 favorite new character is Luna --I am very fond of her. Then there's this one from the Albert Hall transcript: http://www.mugglenet.com/jkr-royalalbert.shtml I really like Professor Lupin as a character because he's someone that also has a failing, because although he is a wonderful teacher (one I myself would have liked to have had as a teacher) and a wonderful man, he does like to be liked and that's where he slips up. He's been disliked so often that he's always so pleased to have friends, so he cuts them an awful lot of slack. --- I just can't help being very afraid of what would happen to Lupin if he met some friends who weren't as nice as Sirius and James. Resisting peer pressure doesn't seem to be something he's good at. I think it would be dangerous to assume that Voldemort has lost his ability to charm just because he looks like he's part snake and has a dodgy reputation. Lupin wouldn't judge anybody by their reputation and he wouldn't think someone was evil just because they had undergone a dangerous transformation. Pippin From dk59us at yahoo.com Sat Nov 13 21:08:57 2004 From: dk59us at yahoo.com (Eustace_Scrubb) Date: Sat, 13 Nov 2004 21:08:57 -0000 Subject: Harry taking credit for what he didnt do... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117804 Del comments : > 4. It's not so much the fact that Harry reminds Draco that he fought > LV that bothers me. It's the fact that he dismissed Draco so easily. > Harry's father made exactly the same kind of mistake : assuming that > someone couldn't be dangerous, and we know where it got him. I say > Harry had better be very careful and stop assuming Draco is no real > menace. Maybe Draco is really harmless, but maybe he's not. As Moody > would say : constant vigilance. Eustace_Scrubb: While I think Harry's reaction to Draco in this case is entirely reasonable, I share your fear that deep down he (and most of us readers) have been lulled into complacency about Draco's ability to cause mischief. And I think it's quite possible we'll find out more along these lines by the time we get to Chapter 6 of HBP, "Draco's Detour." Cheers, Eustace_Scrubb From R.Vink2 at chello.nl Sat Nov 13 22:02:22 2004 From: R.Vink2 at chello.nl (Renee) Date: Sat, 13 Nov 2004 22:02:22 -0000 Subject: Bad guys and black hats (was Re: Unreliable narrator) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117805 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "pippin_999" wrote: > > >> Alla: > > By the way, you frogot about this quote: > > > > > > Who is your favourite character? > > I love: Harry, Hermione, Ron, Hagrid, Dumbledore, Ginny, Fred, > > George and Lupin. I love writing (though would not necessarily > want to meet) Snape. My favourite new character is Luna > Lovegood. > > Pippin: > > Hmmm...which section is that from? Renee: It's on her website. Look under FAQ, and then click the envelope "About me". Renee From TheMuffinMan0311 at comcast.net Sat Nov 13 16:22:21 2004 From: TheMuffinMan0311 at comcast.net (TheMuffinMan0311 at comcast.net) Date: Sat, 13 Nov 2004 16:22:21 +0000 Subject: Kreacher's bandages Message-ID: <111320041622.15646.419634BD00071A9100003D1E2205886442CECECCCF020E03020700009A030A089B@comcast.net> No: HPFGUIDX 117806 > Carol earlier: > "Has anyone noticed that Kreacher's hands are bandaged as if he > has just ironed them when Harry tries to contact Sirius Black using > Umbridge's fireplace (OoP Am. ed. 740)? Has he ironed them in advance > because he's in the process of betraying his master or because he has > just injured Buckbeak or . . . ? What you're all missing is what Dumbledore said at the end of the book! (funny how much you guys forget) Kreacher was taking orders from the Malfoys who are related to the Blacks, so he wasn't disobeying orders. He was told to get out, he went to the Malfoys, the Malfoys gave him an order, he followed without needing to punish himself because he was taking orders from a family member! So he definitely got those bandages from somewhere other than beating himself...\ TheMuffinMan, "Its Always Darkest Just Before It Gets Pitch Black..." From TheMuffinMan0311 at comcast.net Sat Nov 13 16:28:22 2004 From: TheMuffinMan0311 at comcast.net (TheMuffinMan0311 at comcast.net) Date: Sat, 13 Nov 2004 16:28:22 +0000 Subject: Apparition lessons / 'can't apparate at Hogwarts' Message-ID: <111320041628.25356.4196362600015F320000630C2200750330CECECCCF020E03020700009A030A089B@comcast.net> No: HPFGUIDX 117807 About the suggestion earlier about them being able to take apparating lessons at Hogsmeade because magic was allowed... Apparation still couldn't be possible in Hogsmeade, as Hermoine stated many times, it's not just the initial castle that is enchanted THE WHOLE GROUNDS AND SURROUNDING AREAS ARE ENCHANTED, in fact we don't even know the limit to how far this enchantment can reach. We can guess that it's definitely the castle, the ground, Hogsmeade, and the initial forest but it could stretch for miles (and I expect it does). Otherwise (hypothetically if the enchantment didn't go very far) someone could Apparate not directly on the school grounds but in the forest were the enchantment ends and simply walk to the school, so I figure that this enchantment goes for mile and miles, maybe even hundreds of miles, way out of reach were Harry or anyone could possibly reach... So I doubt anybody's going to be taking apparation lessons near Hogwarts without out a train. TheMuffinMan, "Its Always Darkest Just Before Its Gets Pitch Black..." From R.Vink2 at chello.nl Sat Nov 13 22:26:00 2004 From: R.Vink2 at chello.nl (Renee) Date: Sat, 13 Nov 2004 22:26:00 -0000 Subject: Bad guys and black hats (was Re: Unreliable narrator) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117808 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "pippin_999" > > Maybe Jo can't like the villains -- but she keeps saying she > does. IIRC, the only ones she's ever said she doesn't like are > Vernon and Umbridge. For example in the Edinburgh transcript > at the website, she says that she loves Rita, that she quite likes > Rita, no "as a character" qualifiers and then she says that Rita is > "loathsome -- morally horrible." > Renee: I forgot to reply to this... Yes, she does say she loves Rita Skeeter, but her list of favourites never includes Rita, whereas it includes Lupin twice (in the Edinburgh interview and in the FAQ section of her website), together with the Trio, Dumbledore, Hagrid, Luna Lovegood and maybe Ginny, Fred&George, but I'm not sure about them. It seems he's in good company, to say the least. Renee From nkafkafi at yahoo.com Sat Nov 13 22:32:49 2004 From: nkafkafi at yahoo.com (nkafkafi) Date: Sat, 13 Nov 2004 22:32:49 -0000 Subject: =?iso-8859-1?q?Re:_JKR=92s_giant_mistake=3F?= In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117809 > Pippin: > Mistakes, such as the famous wand order mess, are random > and thus as likely to be spectacular as not. An apparent > inconsistency which shows signs of having been slipped > inconspicuously into innocent chapters, and occurs only in one > direction, so that we don't have Dumbledore or Sirius saying "the > Dark Lord", smacks of intent rather than coincidence. But I could > be wrong. Neri: There is an obvious explanation to the one-sidedness of the mistake. JKR thinks of Voldemort as "Voldemort". Therefore she is liable to forget from time to time and use the name in the words of a character who wouldn't use it. There is no reason for the opposite mistake to happen. I suspect these "Voldemort's" cases are glimpses of the puppeteer caught for a second behind her puppets. > > Renee: > > > I keep saying we need more information, though I agree with > everyone who said that saying "Voldemort" doesn't separate the > white sheep from the black.<< > > Pippin: > I think we have all the information we need. Sirius and Lupin who > use the name freely, were still suspected of being spies and > Death Eaters during VWI. Neri: It seems many of the good characters don't like it when people are saying the name, and don't always realize that this is likely to be a proof of courage. Quite the opposite, in fact, they are likely to see it as something suspicious as often as not. DD is above suspicion, but DD (as Snape says) is great enough to use the name, and DD was always considered a bit crazy even by many of his admirers (Percy and Ron in SS/PS, for example). But even Ron doesn't like it when Harry uses the name, and the Order members don't like it when Sirius uses it. I think that during WVI they were likely to see this behavior suspicious in a young person just out of Hogwarts. It might paint him as having something to do with the dark arts rather than a brave man. But I won't be surprised if Harry is going to change this in VWII and teach everybody to say the name, and then the DE's might really be in trouble. > Pippin: > Pettigrew also must have used it before -- at least, Sirius > remarks that Pettigrew is now afraid of it, "What, scared to hear > your old master's name?" said Black. "I don't blame you Peter. > His lot aren't very happy with you, are they?" -PoA ch 19. Neri: This is a good point. Sirius thinks Pettigrew flinches because he betrayed Voldemort. So do only DEs that betrayed Voldemort have a problem with the name? This would fit with Snape's behavior. Or is it all of them, but Sirius doesn't know about it, so he just explains Pettigrew flinching in the most logical way? But I think it is clear that Sirius at least, and probably most of the good guys (perhaps excluding only DD), don't realize that the DEs have a thing about the name. I think Sirius and Lupin started to say the name for the same reason Hermione did, in defiance against their fear. > > barmaid tries again to enter this thread: > > > > I will pose my question from further up this thread here again. > When did people stop saying the name and why? It seems > likely that there was a time when it was widely spoken -- it is > certainly widely known - - so when and how did this name taboo > come in to play.< > > Pippin > I think it is analogous to the name of G-d in the Hebrew > scriptures, which the pious may write but not speak. Hagrid isn't > afraid to write the name down, only insecure about how to spell > it. > Neri: Perhaps the devil would be a more proper example. I think that in many religions addressing him by name is thought to be similar to summoning him. Stacey wrote in #117789: When I first noticed in PS/SS that Hagrid wouldn't easily say "Voldemort" and then when Harry does in front of someone (Ron, Hagrid? I don't have SS to refer to) and gets told to say "He-who- must-not-be-named" it reminded me of people and cancer. There are still older people who refer to cancer and whisper it when discussing it. The purpose of the whispering that if you can't be heard discussing it, it can't affect you. It is driven by fear. Even with Voldemort "gone" for 11 years, people still remember their fear of him so clearly that they can't say the name. Neri: This is the amazing thing. We are told next to nothing about how this fear of the name developed. What are its origins? So Voldy was a terrorist and killed many people, but still why are so many people fear the name? What exactly are they scared of? As Pippin and Stacy pointed out, it seems to be fear of something unnatural. There is of course Valky's theory that the fear of Voldemort's name is the source of its power, which made me go into all the research in the first place: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/104274 Neri From peckham at cyberramp.net Sat Nov 13 22:44:05 2004 From: peckham at cyberramp.net (luna_loco) Date: Sat, 13 Nov 2004 22:44:05 -0000 Subject: Why did the founders retain Slytherin's house? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117810 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "lupinlore" wrote: > > > Lets delve a little into that ever-popular topic, Slytherin House. > We know that Salazar departed in a huff when the other founders > didn't agree with his pureblood policies. Why then, did the other > founders allow his House to remain part of Hogwarts. Here are a few > possible reasons. They aren't necessarily exclusive, so a > combination of several of them is possible: > I believe that the primary reason the remaining founders kept the Slytherin house was a combination of political and practical convienence. Consider the immediate issues of closing the house once Salazar left: I) What to do if Salazar returned? The possibility for a reconciliation must have existed for at least a short time after Salazar left. Closing or removing his house would make for a lot of hard feelings if Salazar came back. II) What to do with the students in the Slytherin house? After Salazar's students had been in a seperate house for several years, it would seem unfair to just scatter them among the remaining houses. III) How do you reprogram the Sorting Hat? The Hat's songs imply, if not prove, that it was created before Salazar left. Could the remaining founder's retrain the hat to only sort into three houses instead of four? When you consider these issues from the founder's prespective versus some future events that they would have no knowledge of, it seems quite reasonable that they kept the Slytherin house around. Allen From willsonkmom at msn.com Sat Nov 13 22:45:33 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Sat, 13 Nov 2004 22:45:33 -0000 Subject: Apparition lessons / 'can't apparate at Hogwarts' In-Reply-To: <111320041628.25356.4196362600015F320000630C2200750330CECECCCF020E03020700009A030A089B@comcast.net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117811 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, TheMuffinMan0311 at c... wrote: > > > About the suggestion earlier about them being able to take > apparating lessons at Hogsmeade because magic was allowed... > Apparation still couldn't be possible in Hogsmeade, as Hermoine > stated many times, it's not just the initial castle that is enchanted > THE WHOLE GROUNDS AND SURROUNDING AREAS ARE ENCHANTED, in fact we > don't even know the limit to how far this enchantment can reach. We > can guess that it's definitely the castle, the ground, Hogsmeade, and > the initial forest but it could stretch for miles (and I expect it > does). Potioncat: It's hard to believe the people of Hogsmeade would give up the ability to Apparate at will. Do you have canon for that? From pjcousins at btinternet.com Sat Nov 13 23:16:04 2004 From: pjcousins at btinternet.com (confusinglyso) Date: Sat, 13 Nov 2004 23:16:04 -0000 Subject: Who knows? DD knows, that's who. Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117812 In Message 117760 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, > Barry Arrowsmith > Date: Sat Nov 13, 2004 2:04 pm > Subject: Who knows? DD knows, that's who. snip > This is somewhat at odds with the next passage after Harry brings up > the possibility that it could be Neville: > "He chose the boy he thought most likely to be a danger to him," > Oh yes? And on what evidence did Voldy base this assessment and how > the > hell does DD know? We're talking inner-most thoughts and fears here; > it's unlikely to have been a topic of conversation down at the DE > Glee Club. But DD goes further: > "He saw himself in you before he had ever seen you [...] gave you > powers, and a future, which have fitted you to escape him not once, > but four times so far..." > It changes from knowing to choosing; from a certainty to a guess > (albeit an educated one) on Voldy's part. Mind you, the Ministry > seem > to be hedging their bets - they left that question mark there. But > DD expresses no doubts, it's Harry. > Kneasy > P.S. > I notice that while I was cobbling this together iris_ft put up a > post that also wonders at events pre-GH. Good oh. Two heads are > better than one. Kneasy (end of postscript) >> From: "iris_ft" >> Date: Fri Nov 12, 2004 10:35 pm >> Subject: Re: Inside Harry's mind >> --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" >> wrote: >> > I think Harry was born with powers similar to those of his >> > parents, >> > who were talented and fairly powerful wizards but nowhere near >> > as >> > powerful as Tom Riddle (putting the memory of yourself into a >> > diary so >> > that you can possess the person who confides in it is no mean >> > feat). >> One question comes to my mind after reading this thread, and more >> especially what you write, Carol : what if ? the bit of >> Voldemort ? >> inside Harry was there BEFORE what happened in Godric's Hollow ? >> After all, maybe some of Voldemort's powers were left in Harry >> because there was already in the boy something special, making him >> particularly receptive to them. Something like a "compost" or >> an "atavism"; I don't know. >> I don't like precisely that idea, and moreover it is not already >> very clear, I need to consider it better; but I wonder if Harry >> wasn't "partly Voldemort" even before the Dark Lord tried to kill >> him. >> Just a supposition, probably completely out of topic, >> Amicalement, >> Iris Now confusinglyso, Phil, Why did Voldemort see himself in Harry ? Chamber of Secrets, Tom Riddle comments on Harry's likeness to himself. Throughout the books we are reminded how alike Harry is to his dad, James Potter. Therefore James Potter and Tom Riddle must have been alike. James Potter defied Voldemort 3 times and so must have been known to Voldemort. Would this reasoning explain why TR!LV chose Harry ? Is there a family connection ? Could a family connection, putting a bit of Voldemort in Harry, support Iris and Kneasy above ? Phil, first post in a long while. From sherriola at earthlink.net Sat Nov 13 23:16:10 2004 From: sherriola at earthlink.net (Sherry Gomes) Date: Sat, 13 Nov 2004 16:16:10 -0700 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Is Dudley...slow? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <000601c4c9d6$c3d24c20$0400a8c0@pensive> No: HPFGUIDX 117813 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "ericoppen" wrote: > I've sometimes wondered if a lot of Petunia's attitudes couldn't be > explained by saying that Dudley's...slow of wit. What I think is now > called a "special-needs child", although the PC authorities may have > come up with fresh euphemisms. Sherry now: I don't think he's developmentally disabled or learning disabled in anyway. Just a spoiled brat, who has never been made to think or problem solve or any thing else like that. In fact, when it's important to Dudley, he can be quite clever. He's good at manipulating his parents, giving them the actions and reactions that will gain him the most materially or in sympathy. He did that from book one, when he pretended to cry in order to try to get his parents not to bring Harry to the zoo. He does it in the fifth book, by making his parents believe he's doing something every evening, when he's really out beating up small children. No, I don't think he's slow or stupid. I think he simply chooses to use his intelligence for other purposes than education in school. Sherry G From TheMuffinMan0311 at comcast.net Sat Nov 13 16:41:42 2004 From: TheMuffinMan0311 at comcast.net (TheMuffinMan0311 at comcast.net) Date: Sat, 13 Nov 2004 16:41:42 +0000 Subject: Did DD lie about the Prophecy ? Message-ID: <111320041641.1785.419639460006D1AD000006F92200734830CECECCCF020E03020700009A030A089B@comcast.net> No: HPFGUIDX 117814 Del wrote: > First, let's examine what we believe about the circumstances > surrounding the first prophecy. > - It was delivered months before it would come true. > - It was delivered when Trelawney was talking to DD in the > middle of a crowded pub. > - It was delivered to DD. > Now, let's see about the second prophecy. It was delivered : > - on the afternoon of the day things would happen > - when Harry and Trelawney were alone > - to Harry alone My post will not be about the conditions themselves, but I'd like to challenge two parts of your ACTUAL conditions. I have a book on divination, and I'm sure I will read it later, but for now I wish to challenge the fact that: Dumbledore and Trelawney were NOT in fact, in a crowded but, but were actually in a pub that was almost always empty, AND that he was not even IN the initial pub. Dumbledore, as said in the book, had actually had the interview ABOVE the bar, in a private room, therefore not in a crowded room. Also there is the fact that the interview took place at the Hogs Head (chuckle)! Like Hermione had stated earlier in the book, The Hogs Head was almost always empty because of its dirtiness and un-pleasant conditions! So the connection between DD and Harry's prophecy witnesses is the fact they they were both private...I shall take a look at my divination book later to see about the conditions of a prophecy and I will see you later... The Muffin Man "It's Always Darkest Just Before It Gets Pitch Black..." From Neener75 at aol.com Sat Nov 13 19:51:55 2004 From: Neener75 at aol.com (katya752004) Date: Sat, 13 Nov 2004 19:51:55 -0000 Subject: Sirius's Future Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117815 The poll said to post my "substantially different" idea here, so (as a new poster) here goes: I, for one, am not thoroughly convinced that Sirius is, in fact, dead. I mean, the veil is in the Department of MYSTERIES which means (to me) they're not entirely sure of the functions/fine points of what they study. I don't have canon in front of me, but I remember Remus saying something like Sirius couldn't come back through the veil. That's different than being dead. *Side note* And, how does a werewolf (albeit a nice one) know so much about the inner workings of the department of mysteries to be so certain? The troupe of heroes heard voices through the veil, and dead people don't talk... ghosts do, but I'm convinced that being who he is, Sirius would not go that route. (Although, I am curious how Nearly Headless Nick would know one way or the other. He seemed pretty certain... was that for Harry's sake?) I am also intrigued by the posts that seem to point at a link between the MM sap and those people hearing the voices. It would certainly give Neville some importance if he deciphered that one. So, in short, I do NOT believe that Sirius is PROPRERLY dead and I believe that Harry will have some future contact with him (perhaps through the mirror, some other magical device, or perhaps through the veil itself?) I suppose, in review, it's not that substantially different from the "dead and contact via magical instrument" option. I just can't buy into the fact that he's dead with so many loose ends hanging about. I suppose Harry must feel somewhat similarly (or he would not have even tried the mirror, right?) Respectfully submitted -- Katya From Neener75 at aol.com Sat Nov 13 20:19:27 2004 From: Neener75 at aol.com (katya752004) Date: Sat, 13 Nov 2004 20:19:27 -0000 Subject: JKRs giant mistake? / "Voldemort," not "Voldy" In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117816 Stacey says: > Also, if I remember correctly JKR herself has stated that > Voldemort should be referred to as Voldemort (not Voldie > etc.)in fan discussions, as it is disrespectful to refer > to him otherwise... Katya here: On jkrowling.com under rumors, I found the following: "Erm... I was joking. I thought it was very amusing when I found a chatroom full of people calling him 'Voldy'..." I also wanted to ask about the fact that two of the three references uses Voldemort's name in reference to his supporters. Only Crouch Jr.!Moody refers to the man himself. Just a thought. -- Katya From meriaugust at yahoo.com Sat Nov 13 23:26:37 2004 From: meriaugust at yahoo.com (meriaugust) Date: Sat, 13 Nov 2004 23:26:37 -0000 Subject: Did DD lie about the Prophecy ? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117817 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "delwynmarch" wrote: > > Meri wrote : > " IIRC the interview between DD and Trelawny was taking place in a > room Trelawny rented above the bar at the Hog's Head. And this makes a > little more sense, because a crowded bar is not the best place for a > job interview, even one DD isn't planning to take that seriously. " > > Del replies : > You mean that the interview took place in the very bedroom Trelawney > rented ? Could be. I'd never imagined it that way, but it could be. > > That still wouldn't explain : snip > - how they could have been overheard. I'm not saying it's impossible, > I'm just saying that it's even more improbable than I previously > thought. Meri: Not impossible or even that improbable. Think about this: DD and Trelawny are in her (as potioncat suggested) sitting room, with DD's back to the door that leads out to the hallway. They are having tea, the interview is proceeding v. badly from Trelawny's standpoint and DD is just about to excuse himself when she goes into her trance. Meanwhile, the spy, whoever he is, is standing in the deserted hallway with his ear pressed to the sitting room door and is starting to get psyched because he's actually gonna hear something important for a change. And meanwhile again, good old Aberforth, knowing of his brother's weakness for snacks, decides to take a tray of tea and crumpets up to Trelawny's room. As Trelawny gets to the dramatic part of the prophecy, Aberforth catches the spy in the act and scares him away, keeping him from hearing the crucial info, DD, hearing the disturbance, turns away from the now quiet Trelawny and bursts into the hallway to see his brother and the shattered tea tray, puts two and two together and realizes that he's been spied on. Del: It would almost mean that whoever overheard them was actually > spying on them. Which brings even more questions to my mind : > - Who was the spy sying on ? DD or Trelawney ? Why would anyone spy on > Trelawney ? Meri: Surely DD was being followed, watched, spied on and tailed by as many double agents as LV could afford. LV knowing exactly where and what DD was doing at all times was probably a big priority for the DEs. If DD ever even thought of leaving Hogwarts Castle he was probably watched. Even DD, whatever powers he might have, cannot tell the future. How was he to know that Trelawny would choose that night to deliver a prophecy of such importance, especially seeing as she had never shown any talent before? Sybil, as DD tells us, chose the Hog's Head for its cheapness and perhaps DD didn't want to inconvenience her by asking her to come up to the castle. Meri - agreeing at least that any speculating leads to more questions... From Neener75 at aol.com Sat Nov 13 20:29:38 2004 From: Neener75 at aol.com (katya752004) Date: Sat, 13 Nov 2004 20:29:38 -0000 Subject: Harry taking credit for what he didn't do... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117818 > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, TheMuffinMan0311 at c... wrote: > snip. > All Harry did was think about how he was going to die! He saved > himself by luck! Even if you say he has the reason to gloat about > this feat, yes he did not get killed, but he still shouldn't make > it as if he won some heroic battle! THAT is my point here. > > (snip) Katya: Could it possibly be that Harry was seizing an opportunity to have a go at Draco? Lord knows, they've been at each other in little ways throughout the series so far. Harry KNOWS that Lucius is a DE. He is fairly assured that Draco will follow in those footsteps. He's assessed his enemy and knows to keep an eye on him... But after going through so much, Draco's petty "you're going to pay" (1) isn't impressive and (2) is not exactly a newsflash. Those in league with darkness have been trying to make him pay since he was an infant. Just my take -- Katya From TheMuffinMan0311 at comcast.net Sat Nov 13 20:35:00 2004 From: TheMuffinMan0311 at comcast.net (TheMuffinMan0311 at comcast.net) Date: Sat, 13 Nov 2004 20:35:00 +0000 Subject: Harry taking credit for what he didn't do... Message-ID: <111320042035.14596.41966FF4000C097F000039042200737478CECECCCF020E03020700009A030A089B@comcast.net> No: HPFGUIDX 117819 > Alla: > And we have to agree to disagree on "being saved by luck" thing. Yeah, as much I would probably disagree there's no point in argueing when 4 people disagree with me, SO yes let's resign on a "agree to disagree." The Muffin Man "Its Always Darkest Just Before It Gets Pitch Black" From easimm at yahoo.com Sat Nov 13 21:32:51 2004 From: easimm at yahoo.com (curlyhornedsnorkack) Date: Sat, 13 Nov 2004 21:32:51 -0000 Subject: The length of the Pensieve Scene In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117820 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "delwynmarch" wrote: > This might have been discussed before, but I'll readily admit that I > don't read most Worst Memory threads, because they always go back to > discussing the same old themes. > > My question is : why is the scene described in Snape's Worst Memory > so long ? What Snape was doing during the scenes before he was spotted by the Marauders was not innocent and harmless; he was being a sneak. In POA, Lupin described how Snape was hunting for information on where Lupin went every month. Perhaps Snape didn't want Harry to know to what extent he spied on Harry's father and his friends. "curlyhornedsnorkack" From annegirl11 at juno.com Sat Nov 13 23:40:34 2004 From: annegirl11 at juno.com (annegirl11 at juno.com) Date: Sat, 13 Nov 2004 18:40:34 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Sirius's Future Message-ID: <20041113.184111.4072.2.annegirl11@juno.com> No: HPFGUIDX 117821 Katya said: [Some very interesting stuff that I'm snipping b/c I don't have any specific comments on it] ITA. Have you depressing naysayers never watched tv? No body, no death. At least, no certain death. And portals never do what you think they do. The whole thing was wayyy too dodgy to be a straight-out death. As for Sirius' future, I don't think we'll see him corporeal, fully human again, at least not on-page. He'll be back as a portrait, or something to do with that mirror, or in some way "a memory". That's my story and I'm stickin to it. Aura ~*~ "What he didn't like about heroes was that they were usually suicidally gloomy when sober and homicidally insane when drunk." - Discword http://archive.skyehawke.com/authors.php?no=606 From foxmoth at qnet.com Sat Nov 13 23:41:26 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Sat, 13 Nov 2004 23:41:26 -0000 Subject: Why did the founders retain Slytherin's house? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117822 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "lupinlore" wrote: er than three. > > 5) The most interesting possibility, as flypaper for Dark Wizards and racists. They may have realized/expected that most students with Dark tendencies would end up in Slytherin. By allowing the House to continue they insured such students would be easy to spot and observe. Similarly, they probably realized that pureblood theorists would tend to find their way into Slytherin, and could be contained and observed as well. < In the first place, Slytherin wasn't kicked out for being a Dark Wizard or for his pure blood policies. He was already taking only pureblood students when the school first started, and despite that, he worked in harmony with the others for many years. And as nobody knew about the Chamber, it is unlikely that anyone could prove he had gone dark. Conversely, if he were openly a dark wizard, he wouldn't have had to keep the existence of the chamber a secret. Since he was such a good friend of Godric Gryffindor, he probably wasn't evil to begin with. Perhaps his desire for power led him to experiment with dark magic in secret, like Saruman in LOTR. No doubt Salazar believed that he, being of nature's nobility, was too noble to be corrupted by it. But Salazar left because he wanted *all* the houses to adopt his purebloods only policy, "Slytherin wished to be more _selective_ about the students admitted to Hogwarts. He believed that magical learning should be kept withinall-magic families. He disliked taking students of Muggle parentage, believing them to be untrustworthy. After a while, there was serious disagreement on the subject between Slytherin and Gryffindor, and Slytherin left the school." --CoS ch 9 So when Slytherin left, did he take all his students with him? I doubt it. I would say that then as now, Slytherin is a house divided, and there are and were families with children in Slytherin who thought Salazar had become too extreme. Anyway, as I said on another thread, all the houses are racist. It's just that the Slytherins carry the definition of halfbreed a little further. Pippin From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Sat Nov 13 23:41:36 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Sat, 13 Nov 2004 23:41:36 -0000 Subject: Harry taking credit for what he didn't do... In-Reply-To: <111320042035.14596.41966FF4000C097F000039042200737478CECECCCF020E03020700009A030A089B@comcast.net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117823 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, TheMuffinMan0311 at c... wrote: snip. > Yeah, as much I would probably disagree there's no point in argueing > when 4 people disagree with me, SO yes let's resign on a "agree to > disagree." Alla: Oh, I did not mean to say that you should stop arguing your point, while you still want to. Sorry! I was speaking for myself and for myself only as in "me and you should agree to disagree on that point". Not even that me and you should stop debating at all. It should not matter if you are outnumbered at this moment because any time the poster or posters will show up who will support you. Please don't feel discouraged. :o) From jlnbtr at yahoo.com Sat Nov 13 23:05:14 2004 From: jlnbtr at yahoo.com (Juli) Date: Sat, 13 Nov 2004 15:05:14 -0800 (PST) Subject: Apparition lessons / 'can't apparate at Hogwarts' In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041113230514.74263.qmail@web53103.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 117824 --- potioncat wrote: > Potioncat: > It's hard to believe the people of Hogsmeade would > give up the ability to Apparate at will. Do you > have canon for that? I agree with Potioncat, what fun would it be to live in the only entirely wizard town in the UK if you can't even apparate? I think people go there because they can do magic at will. If you can't do magic in a magic town, what's the point? Sure you can't apparate in Hogwarts and its grounds, but you sure must be able to apparate at Hogsmeade, I know I have no canon to back it up, but how else could you get there? Yeah, I know there's the Floo Network, Brooms, Port-Keys, and the train, but Apparition just seemes so much fun. Juli From nrenka at yahoo.com Sun Nov 14 00:01:27 2004 From: nrenka at yahoo.com (nrenka) Date: Sun, 14 Nov 2004 00:01:27 -0000 Subject: Why did the founders retain Slytherin's house? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117825 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "pippin_999" wrote: > Anyway, as I said on another thread, all the houses are racist. > It's just that the Slytherins carry the definition of halfbreed a > little further. Hufflepuff too, the Founder who said "I'll take the lot and teach all of them"? It seems that, if anyone, she comes off the best from the Sorting Hat's Song in OotP. I think it's still a distinction worth making between the kinds of discrimination that Slytherin House embodies, the quality-based conceptions of Ravenclaw and Gryffindor, and Helga's more open policy. Let's not collapse it into 'little further', because it's a rather meaningful little further. I don't agree with the contention that not having full incorporation of non-human students in Hogwarts is racist. For example, with house- elves, JKR describes them as having a 'different' kind of magic than wizards--they can do some things that wizards absolutely cannot do, although there is a good deal of magic that they cannot do. The situation with Winky in GoF seems ambiguous to me to what degree a house-elf is functionally capable of using a wand. Some mutation of this is potentially applicable to merpeople, centaurs, etc...who is to say that they would be best served by a Hogwarts education, with the humans? This is not to say that wizarding society doesn't treat magical non- humans badly, because they do. But the discrimination against them is not the same as the discrimination against the magical human of Muggle parentage. Too many initial and situational conditions are too different. (They are, however, perhaps both symptoms of the same spiritual malaise, the same thing which is at the root of the Dark Arts; the conviction that one is essentially (naturally, ontologically) superior, and thus entitled to what one wants.) Isn't this what Hermione is doing with SPEW, in a sense? There *is* a wrong being done to house-elves in wizarding society at large, and they are being treated poorly, but Hermione is going about it with little care or regard for what house-elves really are, and what they might want for themselves. My two cents. -Nora gets back to things like the story of Renaud et Armide From TheMuffinMan0311 at comcast.net Sat Nov 13 23:49:25 2004 From: TheMuffinMan0311 at comcast.net (TheMuffinMan0311 at comcast.net) Date: Sat, 13 Nov 2004 23:49:25 +0000 Subject: Apparition lessons / 'can't apparate at Hogwarts' Message-ID: <111320042349.14483.41969D84000B5497000038932200750784CECECCCF020E03020700009A030A089B@comcast.net> No: HPFGUIDX 117826 Juli: > I agree with Potioncat, what fun would it be to live > in the only entirely wizard town in the UK if you > can't even apparate? I think people go there because > they can do magic at will. If you can't do magic in a > magic town, what's the point? Sure you can't apparate > in Hogwarts and its grounds, but you sure must be able > to apparate at Hogsmeade, I know I have no canon to > back it up, but how else could you get there? Yeah, I > know there's the Floo Network, Brooms, Port-Keys, and > the train, but Apparition just seems so much fun. I never said that magic wasn't allowed, magic is allowed there, but think of the dangers of having it able to be apparated to? Do you know how easy it would be to get into Hogwarts if you could apparate at Hogsmeade then take a 5 minute walk to the castle? That would be the stupidest idea of "defence" I'd have ever heard of. I believe that the founding headmasters were smarter than that and had a barier miles long, otherwise, Hogswart could be under siege if Voldie had enough power! Sorry, but I believe there's no way an ancient barrier like the one around Hogwarts would ever be limited to Hogsmeade so the villagers could have "fun". (This is not an angry tone, just a "I don't agree" tone.) TheMuffinMan From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Sun Nov 14 00:19:00 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Sun, 14 Nov 2004 00:19:00 -0000 Subject: Why did the founders retain Slytherin's house? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117827 Nora: > Hufflepuff too, the Founder who said "I'll take the lot and teach all > of them"? It seems that, if anyone, she comes off the best from the > Sorting Hat's Song in OotP. > > I think it's still a distinction worth making between the kinds of > discrimination that Slytherin House embodies, the quality-based > conceptions of Ravenclaw and Gryffindor, and Helga's more open > policy. Let's not collapse it into 'little further', because it's a rather meaningful little further. Alla: Indeed, Nora. I agree that Helga comes out looking the best from the last Song, but even though Ravena and Godric chose their students based on particular qualities, these qualities are not exactly genetic. You CAN work on being braver person than you are now. I think you can also work on being smarter person, although of course it is not always true. But you can do NOTHING ,absolutely nothing to change who your ancestors were. Nora: > I don't agree with the contention that not having full incorporation > of non-human students in Hogwarts is racist. snip. > This is not to say that wizarding society doesn't treat magical non- > humans badly, because they do. But the discrimination against them > is not the same as the discrimination against the magical human of > Muggle parentage. Too many initial and situational conditions are > too different. Alla: Do we even know that centaurs or goblins ever wanted ANYTHING to do with human educational system? Who knows , they probably have their own schools. We don't know how discrimination against non-humans started. Was it a result of some kind of bitter war between the species? Did non-humans and humans EVER lived together not just peacefully, but as EQUALS? I have more questions than answers. From foxmoth at qnet.com Sun Nov 14 01:02:35 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Sun, 14 Nov 2004 01:02:35 -0000 Subject: Why did the founders retain Slytherin's house? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117828 Pippin: > > Anyway, as I said on another thread, all the houses are racist. It's just that the Slytherins carry the definition of halfbreed a little further. << Nora: > Hufflepuff too, the Founder who said "I'll take the lot and teach all of them"? It seems that, if anyone, she comes off the best from the Sorting Hat's Song in OotP.<< Pippin: 'Fraid so. Unless "the lot" includes werewolves and mixed race children, who seem to be conspicuously absent. And what comes from the mouths of Gryffindor-educated children is hardly better than Draco's spouting, though indeed they'd never dream of saying things like that about Muggleborns. Hermione: "Don't trust him, he's a werewolf!" Ron: "Get away from me, werewolf!" Hermione: " I've never really liked horses." (referring to Firenze) And don't let's forget the Fountain of Magical Brethren. And what about that citadel of apartheid, Hogsmeade, the only wizarding village in Britain? I wonder what happens if you're a Muggleborn Hogsmeade resident, and your Muggle mum wants to vist the grandkids -- or gets too old to live on her own. Also there's this, from JKR at Albert Hall: JK Rowling: When he (Harry) first entered the world (of Magic) he had of course expected it to (after spending time with the Dursley's) be this magical wonderland and almost immediately he wandered into Draco Malfoy in the robe shop and found out that Wizards are racist and slowly but surely he's found out that many people in power in the Wizarding World are just as corrupt and nasty as they are in our world. --- Wizards are racist. Not Slytherins are racist, or purebloods are racist. Pippin From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Sun Nov 14 01:13:15 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Sun, 14 Nov 2004 01:13:15 -0000 Subject: Why did the founders retain Slytherin's house? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117829 > Pippin: > 'Fraid so. Unless "the lot" includes werewolves and mixed race > children, who seem to be conspicuously absent. > Alla: What do you mean by "mixed race' in this context? Pippin: > And what comes from the mouths of Gryffindor-educated > children is hardly better than Draco's spouting, though indeed > they'd never dream of saying things like that about Muggleborns. > > Hermione: "Don't trust him, he's a werewolf!" > Ron: "Get away from me, werewolf!" > Hermione: " I've never really liked horses." (referring to Firenze) Alla: Oh, Pippin, Hermione deserves some credit though, does not she? After all she covered for Remus ever since she learned that he is werewolf. I think that even though she should not have said that, she could be excused because of fear for their lives. Ron...hmmm. Yeah, he could be smacked more than Hermione . Yes, "I never liked horses" is very bad remark, very bad. :) Pippin: > Also there's this, from JKR at Albert Hall: > > JK Rowling: > When he (Harry) first entered the world (of Magic) he had of > course expected it to (after spending time with the Dursley's) be > this magical wonderland and almost immediately he wandered > into Draco Malfoy in the robe shop and found out that Wizards > are racist and slowly but surely he's found out that many people > in power in the Wizarding World are just as corrupt and nasty as > they are in our world. > --- > Wizards are racist. Not Slytherins are racist, or purebloods are > racist. Alla: I do think that in this context it is possible that she meant purebloods, because she gaves Malfoy as an example in the same sentence. We do see the examples of very tolerant wisard after all, but even if she meant that WW in the whole is racist, to me it only raises another hint as to the very radical change in the society in general at the end, because again it raises a question whether such society is worth saving at all From Schlobin at aol.com Sun Nov 14 01:22:41 2004 From: Schlobin at aol.com (Schlobin at aol.com) Date: Sat, 13 Nov 2004 20:22:41 EST Subject: [HPFGUOver40] Chapter titles from Half-blood Prince Message-ID: <1e2.2efe96eb.2ec80d61@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 117830 In a message dated 11/12/2004 1:03:55 PM Eastern Standard Time, ladypensieve at yahoo.com writes: OK - latest from JKRs website for those who are interested.... Chapter Two: Spinners End; Chapter Six: Draco's Detour; Chapter Fourteen: Felix Felicis Since Spinners End sounds like a place, and it has been said that this book will be Harry's shortest stay with the Dursleys, it may be that he's going there! I wonder about Draco's Detour, because fanfic has Draco BIG, but in the canon, Draco is someone more to be made fun of. He always seems to end poorly...such as the last chapter of OOP. JKR giving him his own chapter, in a way, seems that it's bringing him back into the fold...giving him more of a part than we've seen before. hmmmm. Your guess on Chapter 14 is as good as anyones...LOL Kathy Hmmmm, well Felix Felicis means happy, fortunate lucky.....given JKR's penchant for names that mean something this could be a character named Felix (maybe HE's the half blood prince) who's particularly happy....Spinners End...could be something about fate, or it could be about the death of spiders.... Re, Draco..I'm afraid that this is one of the reasons I don't read fan fiction. There is no indication in the books that Draco is anything but what he is portrayed as...an evil wizard in training ready to follow after his father, his mother, and his aunts....As far as being a sniveling coward, most evil bullies ARE cowards....and only strike when they are sure their opponent is outnumbered, cringe when cornered (just like Peter Pettigrew in the Shrieking Shack scene), and use underhanded methods to attack their enemies. (I read on a sister list that people were surprised when in the CoS movie, Lucius did not look worried, but rather contemptuous when Draco falls off his broom...this is congruent with the way in which evil people treat their children). Draco has a major role in the books as Harry's contemporary arch-enemy, although he has never played with the "big boys" as Harry has...he's only been part of Umbrage's rein of terror as a toady. OTOH, JKR is a classicist, and writes in the context of a universe where virtue is alive and active. In such a universe (as in our own) transformation is always possible. Someone evil always has the opportunity to turn away from the dark side, and a few do. (Look at the slave trader who wrote Amazing Grace!). In this vein, I wonder if Professor Snape will be the next to die -- protecting Harry perhaps?) I have always predicted that Dumbledore will die in the last book, in the final battle. Snape is an amazingly multidimensional character. I am wondering (this has probably been discussed) if Harry will become the teacher or at least the "student teacher" for the Defense Against the Dark Arts in Book VI. After all, he has successfully taught/coached his classmates -- Neville has improved exponentially -- several have passed their O.W.Ls thanks to Harry's tutelage. Susan McGee in Michigan [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From Schlobin at aol.com Sun Nov 14 01:39:36 2004 From: Schlobin at aol.com (Schlobin at aol.com) Date: Sat, 13 Nov 2004 20:39:36 EST Subject: racism, sexism and sexual orientation in OoP and the rest of the Potterverse Message-ID: <110.3cb8be19.2ec81158@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 117831 I have been extremely impressed with JKR's expansion of the role of women in the OoP. Women, who had previously been defined solely by their relationship with men, now come into their own. What is equally fascinating is that I didn't notice a couple of multi-racial relationships -- in the HP universe, JKR portrays a lovely diverse universe....first, I didn't notice that Cho Chang had an Asian name and was probably Asian until the casting for the GoF...and I also didn't notice that when Fred asked Angelina to the Yule Ball in the GoF that was another multi-racial relationship, and then I TOTALLY missed Ginny and Dean Thomas as another multi-racial relationship -- I was so tickled that Ginny was coming into her own in such splendour.. I stand by my prediction (btw) that Lupin and Sirius were lovers and/or partners.....this theory has been buttressed by the film portrayal of Lupin as a gay man (complete with appropriate music during the boggart scene) -- the gay sub plot was really fun (this relates to canon since JKR reviews the film ahead of time)...when Lupin says "the owls will be arriving by tomorrow morning...parents will not like someone like me teaching their children" and again "people like me are used to losing their jobs and moving"..this is clearly a reference to the plight of closeted gay men in the not so distant past. Also, the scene where Lupin turns into a werewolf and he is crying out "Padfoot! Padfoot" and the scene where Snape says "quarrelling like an old married couple?" to Lupin and Sirius....again it was said that JKR approves changes from canon and this was clearly a change... Please..before someone gets bent out of shape and says that JKR will never include a same gender couple because she doesn't deal with controversial issues like abortion, drug use, pregnancy, and homosexuality...I agree..we'll never see anyone having explicit sex, or talking about safe sex, or condom use, or using drugs...but same gender relationships that are like Molly and Arthur's or Cedric and Cho's are equivalent to mixed gender relationships.... Susan [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Sun Nov 14 01:48:38 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Sun, 14 Nov 2004 01:48:38 -0000 Subject: racism, sexism and sexual orientation in OoP and the rest of the Potterverse In-Reply-To: <110.3cb8be19.2ec81158@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117832 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Schlobin at a... wrote: > I stand by my prediction (btw) that Lupin and Sirius were lovers and/or > partners..... snip. > > Please..before someone gets bent out of shape and says that JKR will never > include a same gender couple because she doesn't deal with controversial issues > like abortion, drug use, pregnancy, and homosexuality...I agree..we'll never > see anyone having explicit sex, or talking about safe sex, or condom use, or > using drugs...but same gender relationships that are like Molly and Arthur's > or Cedric and Cho's are equivalent to mixed gender relationships.... Alla: Well, you won't hear any negativity on this one from me and even though I prefer to see Sirius paired with Snape, any gay pairing or even HINTS at any gay pairing will make me very happy.:o) Sirius and remus would do quite nicely. And I agree there are hints in OOP, which can be interpreted as Remus and Sirius being a couple (them giving a gift to Harry together, Remus always being At Grimmauld Place etc.) I also agree that hints in the movie were even stronger than in OOP canon, but we cannot discuss movie in details here unfortunately. I do hope that JKR agrees with those changes . We also have the quote from JKR that "Sirius was too busy being a rebel to get married" Could it be that she also hints that he was gay? I also agree that we won't see explicit sex or drugs in the books, but just as we may see NON-explicit hetero romance on the side, why can't we see non-explicit gay romance also? From irene_mikhlin at btopenworld.com Sun Nov 14 01:49:42 2004 From: irene_mikhlin at btopenworld.com (Irene) Date: Sun, 14 Nov 2004 01:49:42 +0000 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Is Dudley...slow? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4196B9B6.90402@btopenworld.com> No: HPFGUIDX 117833 ericoppen wrote: > True, he got into > Smeltings---but not being familiar with that sort of pseudo-public- > school, I don't know whether or how much Vernon was able to pull > strings to get him in. About the only school system I'm personally > familiar with is the US public system. > Some of these schools are academically selective, and some not - if your parents have enough money, you are in. Smeltings seems more like a second type. The funny thing is even though JKR tried to kick this kind of school, it came out looking not so bad. It obviously did Dudley lots of good to be away from his parents - the school nurse did more for his health than they ever did, and the fact that the school has managed to find something positive for Dudley to take pride in (boxing) speaks in their favour as well. Irene From Neener75 at aol.com Sun Nov 14 01:22:08 2004 From: Neener75 at aol.com (katya752004) Date: Sun, 14 Nov 2004 01:22:08 -0000 Subject: Winky's Future Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117834 So, is anyone else curious about the way things were left for this poor heart-broken house elf? She was so upset when she believed Crouch had to take care of himself, is she happier now that he's dead and doesn't have to worry about dusting? Will she play a part in the future or is she played out? Now that her family is dead, will she accept one of Hermoine's malformed yarn projects? Will she ever get over her butterbeer addiction? Thanks for any input! -- Katya From jlnbtr at yahoo.com Sun Nov 14 01:30:51 2004 From: jlnbtr at yahoo.com (Juli) Date: Sat, 13 Nov 2004 17:30:51 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Sirius's Future In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041114013051.17371.qmail@web53109.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 117835 Katya wrote: (SNIP) > > The troupe of heroes heard voices through the veil, > and dead people > don't talk... ghosts do, but I'm convinced that > being who he is, > Sirius would not go that route. Hi Katya, last month we discussed the veil and all its mysterys, you can check the tread at message number 115009 and work your way down, I specially like, a post about the resemblance between this veil and a veil in celtic mythology, where in Halloween, dead people can cross the veil and wander the land of the living, since Sirius crossed the veil before he was dead, there's the theory that he could return. Juli From erinellii at yahoo.com Sun Nov 14 04:31:11 2004 From: erinellii at yahoo.com (Erin) Date: Sun, 14 Nov 2004 04:31:11 -0000 Subject: Is Dudley...slow? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117836 Maddy (arguing that Dudley is NOT differently abled) said: >>I don't think he is mentally defficient. He's not the brightest bulb in the box, but I don't think it's anything serious. Take for instance, in PS/SS when he's struggling to figure out how many birthday presents he's got: (from page 21, PS, Bloomsbury/Raincoast) 'And we'll buy you two presents while we're out today. How's that, popkin? Two more presents. Is that alright?' Dudley thought for a moment. It looked like hard work. Finally he said slowly, "So I'll have thirty ... thirty ...' 'Thirty-nine, sweetums,' said Aunt Petunia. 'Oh.' Dudley sat down heavily and grabbed the nearest parcel. 'All right then.' --- > Maddy again: > Petunia doesn't encourage him to figure it out for himself, but > provides the answer for him so he doesn't have to work it out. Erin now: I know I quoted too much, but I wanted to get that scene in there. Because, taken by itself, that scene could be explained away by Petunia's not encouraging Duds to think for himself, but when combined with these lines... PS/SS, Chapter Three: ------- "Dudley was sniffling in the back seat; his father had beaten him around the head for holding them up while he tried to pack his television, VCR, and computer in his sports bag." ------- ... one just has to wonder. I mean, that is not normal behavior for an 11-year-old, is it? Even toddlers have a better understanding of spatial relationships than that! --Erin From technomad at intergate.com Sun Nov 14 06:09:12 2004 From: technomad at intergate.com (ericoppen) Date: Sun, 14 Nov 2004 06:09:12 -0000 Subject: Is Dudley...slow? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117837 > (from page 21, PS, Bloomsbury/Raincoast) > > 'And we'll buy you two presents while we're out today. How's that, > popkin? Two more presents. Is that alright?' > > Dudley thought for a moment. It looked like hard work. Finally he > said slowly, "So I'll have thirty ... thirty ...' > > 'Thirty-nine, sweetums,' said Aunt Petunia. > > 'Oh.' Dudley sat down heavily and grabbed the nearest parcel. 'All > right then.' > > --- > > Maddy again: > > Petunia doesn't encourage him to figure it out for himself, but > > provides the answer for him so he doesn't have to work it out. > > > Erin now: > > I know I quoted too much, but I wanted to get that scene in there. > Because, taken by itself, that scene could be explained away by > Petunia's not encouraging Duds to think for himself, but when > combined with these lines... > > PS/SS, Chapter Three: > ------- > "Dudley was sniffling in the back seat; his father had beaten him > around the head for holding them up while he tried to pack his > television, VCR, and computer in his sports bag." > ------- > > ... one just has to wonder. I mean, that is not normal behavior for > an 11-year-old, is it? Even toddlers have a better understanding of > spatial relationships than that! > > --Erin Precisely! This is the sort of thing that made me begin to wonder about Dinky Duddums. Yes, being horribly spoilt (poor kid!) accounts for a great deal, but still...I have to wonder. If DD or someone _did_ repress/suppress his magical abilities as part of the bargain that gave Baby Harry a place to live, being or seeming "differently abled" (GODS, I hate that sort of language!) might be a side-effect...sort of like how some of the stuff they might have done to/for Neville after his parents' torture might be part of why he struggled for so long. --Eric, who honestly pities Dudley from the bottom of whatever he uses for a heart...and wonders if the Eavesdropper at the Hog's Head wasn't snooping around hoping to catch Dumbledore getting a little bit of hanky-panky in. (Blazing headlines: "Hogwarts Scandal! Headmaster Caught in Loathsome, Frenzied Naked Embrace With Scarlet Woman! As our correspondent, Miss Rita Skeeter, reports, she was at the Hog's Head when she noticed a tryst beginning...") From Arcum_Dagsson at celticwind.zzn.com Sun Nov 14 06:43:24 2004 From: Arcum_Dagsson at celticwind.zzn.com (Shanoah Alkire) Date: Sun, 14 Nov 2004 06:43:24 -0000 Subject: McGonagall giving points (Was Re: Who took more points from Gryffindors) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117838 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "texaschow" wrote: > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "potioncat" > wrote: > > > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Juli wrote: > > > > > > Sue: > > > > ....do you recall McGonagall ever giving any points? I don't. > > > > > > Juli: > > > MM actually gave Harry, Rob, Hernione, Neville, and > > > Luna each 50 points at the end of OoP right after they > > > returned from MoM, 50 points for letting the world > > > know that LV was back. > > > > > > > Potioncat: > > Didn't she give points to Harry and Ron for fighting the troll in > > SS? Or is that movie contamination? (Still cannot find SS in our > > house!) > > ~Cathy~ > She gave 5 points each to Harry and Ron for saving Hermione after she > had deducted 5 points from Hermione for going after the troll. > Earlier, before the "midnight duel," Hermione mentioned that Ron and > Harry being in the hall after hours was going to get them in trouble > and lose the points she had earned in transfiguration for knowing > about switching spells. > > All in all, I'd say that MM does give out points, maybe just not as > often as some others, or maybe e just don't always hear about it. She doesn't give out points very often. There was the time already mentioned in PS, the 250 pts to Griffindor + 50 to Ravenclaw mentioned, the switching spells, which we don't have a number for, since it was "off-screen",and 10 points near the beginning of OoP to Hermione. Incidentally, Oop marks the first time Ravenclaw has ever been awarded points in the books. Hufflepuff hasn't won any yet, and the only person who has ever given points that we know of to Slytherin is Umbridge. In the ongoing contest of "which professor can take the most points from Griffindor", McGonagall is currently 12 points behind Snape. He gradually whittles away the points, while she tends to take them in big chunks... --Arcum From gbannister10 at aol.com Sun Nov 14 08:44:05 2004 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Sun, 14 Nov 2004 08:44:05 -0000 Subject: Who knows? DD knows, that's who. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117839 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "potioncat" wrote: Kneasy: > > There it sat on a shelf in the Ministry, gathering dust, complete > with > > it's own little label dated 16 years previously - > > "S.P.T. to A.P.W.B.D. Dark Lord and (?)Harry Potter. > > > > In his usual end of book explication DD adds the following: > > "The official record was re-labelled after Voldemort's attack on > you as > > a child. It seemed plain to the keeper of the Hall of Prophecy > that > > Voldemort could only have tried to kill you because he knew you to > be > > the one to whom Sybill was referring." > > > Potioncat: > Dark Lord? Was the keeper of the Hall a (former) Death Eater? DD > doesn't tell us what the label said before. Nor does he say if he > agrees with the change. Geoff: If the label was dated 16 years previously, then I read this as being the original label following Dumbledore's meeting with Sybill Trelawney before Harry's birth - Harry isn't 16 until the summer after thie MOM incident. So I suspect the re-labelling is the addition of the words "and (?) Harry Potter". Hence the Dark Lord reference was the original data. Geoff Catching up on a day's worth of posts while in London concert going..... From hickengruendler at yahoo.de Sun Nov 14 09:38:56 2004 From: hickengruendler at yahoo.de (hickengruendler) Date: Sun, 14 Nov 2004 09:38:56 -0000 Subject: teacher (was: Re: [HPFGUOver40] Chapter titles from Half-blood Prince) In-Reply-To: <1e2.2efe96eb.2ec80d61@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117841 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Schlobin at a... wrote: > I am wondering (this has probably been discussed) if Harry will become the > teacher or at least the "student teacher" for the Defense Against the Dark Arts > in Book VI. After all, he has successfully taught/coached his classmates > -- Neville has improved exponentially -- several have passed their O.W.Ls > thanks to Harry's tutelage. > > Susan McGee in Michigan > > > Hickengruendler >From this http://www.quick-quote-quill.org/articles/1999/1099- connectiontransc.html link: (The person who asks on the phone is a teacher, and her students are with her). Question: Anyway, it's very exciting. We just love Harry Potter. We're curious ---- well first of all we can't wait for Books 4, 5, 6 and 7. But after that, we're curious as to whether Harry is going to have a life after Hogwarts, or if maybe, Harry might be a Hogwarts teacher. Answer Rowling: Well, because all your kids said `hello' so nicely in the background there, I am going to give you information I haven't given anyone else and I will tell you that one of the characters, one of Harry's classmates, though it's not Harry himself, does end up a teacher at Hogwarts. But, it is not, maybe the one you think, hint, hint, hint. Yeah, one of them does end up staying at Hogwarts, but --- - Do the kids want to guess at it, Kathleen? Q: Do you guys have a guess as to who it is? (Kids shouting in background) Ron They say Ron. A: No, it's not Ron. I can't see Ron as a teacher. No way. Therefore Harry won't become a teacher, if Rowling didn't change her mind. He might teach the DA again, but after Hogwarts he'll do something else (if he's still alive). This interview also rules out Ron and, since it was in 1999 and therefore before the rumours about everyone else becoming a teacher began, basically Hermione. Since it's likely that JKR meant her with "maybe the one you think". This interview is the reason, why many fans, including me, think that Neville will become a Hogwarts teacher. There is one canon scene that might hint at this as well. In one of his dreams in OotP Harry dreams that Neville and Professor Sprout are waltzing through the RoR with McGonagall playing the bagpipes. Seeing that Harry's dream are often used as foreshadowing (for example the one about Quirrel's turban in book 1) this could mean that McGonagall will be the new Headmistress (having the command), and Neville, who in this dream is linked with Sprout, will be the new Herbology teacher. Of course this is just specualtion, JKR might have put the dream in to remind us about Neville's general interest in Herbology, which was shown us from the very first book one and therefore has to have some significance. Hickengruendler From jlnbtr at yahoo.com Sun Nov 14 03:28:19 2004 From: jlnbtr at yahoo.com (Juli) Date: Sat, 13 Nov 2004 19:28:19 -0800 (PST) Subject: Apparition lessons / 'can't apparate at Hogwarts' In-Reply-To: <111320042349.14483.41969D84000B5497000038932200750784CECECCCF020E03020700009A030A089B@comcast.net> Message-ID: <20041114032819.33688.qmail@web53104.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 117842 --- TheMuffinMan0311 at comcast.net wrote: (EDITED) > I never said that magic wasn't allowed, magic is > allowed there, but think of the dangers of having > it able to be apparated to? Do you know how easy > it would be to get into Hogwarts if you could > apparate at Hogsmeade then take a 5 minute walk > to the castle? Sorry, but I believe there's no way > an ancient barrier like the one around Hogwarts would > ever be limited to Hogsmeade so the villagers could > have "fun". (This is not an angry tone, just a "I > don't agree" tone.) Don't worry, I didn't take it as an angry tone. But I'm sticking to my idea, You should be able to Apparate at Hogsmeade. Besides, I don't think the reason why LV never went to Hogwarts during VWI is that he was (and is) scared of Dumbledore. Somewhere it says that Hogwarts was one of the few safe places. Why? because DD was there to protect his students and his faculty. I didn't mean that Apparition is "fun", I just think it's the best way to get there. Juli From jlnbtr at yahoo.com Sun Nov 14 04:02:42 2004 From: jlnbtr at yahoo.com (jlnbtr) Date: Sun, 14 Nov 2004 04:02:42 -0000 Subject: Sirius's Future In-Reply-To: <20041114013051.17371.qmail@web53109.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117843 On a previous post, I copied the wrong message number for the discussion on the veil, the message I was talking about is 116656, the explanation on Celtic mythology and the veil. Juli, saying "I'm sorry" for the mistake From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com Sun Nov 14 10:24:56 2004 From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (arrowsmithbt) Date: Sun, 14 Nov 2004 10:24:56 -0000 Subject: Who knows? DD knows, that's who. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117844 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "confusinglyso" wrote: > > Why did Voldemort see himself in Harry ? > Chamber of Secrets, Tom Riddle comments on Harry's > likeness to himself. > Throughout the books we are reminded how alike Harry is > to his dad, James Potter. > Therefore James Potter and Tom Riddle must have been alike. > James Potter defied Voldemort 3 times and so must have been > known to Voldemort. > > Would this reasoning explain why TR!LV chose Harry ? > Is there a family connection ? > Could a family connection, putting a bit of Voldemort in Harry, > support Iris and Kneasy above ? > > Phil, first post in a long while. Welcome back. Family connection: it'd be neat if it was so. You know, I never did like the name Potter for an old wizarding family. Seems very out of place amongst the descriptive Black or Malfoy and the frankly weird like Diggle and Dumbledore. I've wondered before if it could be a pseudonym or the result of a name change to disassociate one branch of the family from despised relatives. It'd have to be back a couple of generations though; that's the only way I could see JKR sliding past "the only relatives" restriction. If it happened far enough back it wouldn't count. Second cousin, twice removed, sort of thing. Then there's the "last descendant of Slytherin" obstacle. Might get round that by linking the Potters or Evans to the Riddles, Tom's fathers side rather than the Slytherin maternal line. And Riddle would make a good wizarding name despite Tom's referral to them as Muggles.It'd also fit Jo's love of punning names - the riddle of the Riddles. I like it. But there's no doubt Jo shows interest in families and bloodlines. In one form or another there're references in almost every book, the 'pureblood' division being the most obvious. Hm. Worth thinking about. Kneasy From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com Sun Nov 14 10:50:14 2004 From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (arrowsmithbt) Date: Sun, 14 Nov 2004 10:50:14 -0000 Subject: Is Dudley...slow? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117845 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "ericoppen" wrote: > ...and wonders if the Eavesdropper at the Hog's Head > wasn't snooping around hoping to catch Dumbledore getting a little > bit of hanky-panky in. (Blazing headlines: "Hogwarts Scandal! > Headmaster Caught in Loathsome, Frenzied Naked Embrace With Scarlet > Woman! As our correspondent, Miss Rita Skeeter, reports, she was at > the Hog's Head when she noticed a tryst beginning...") Nice thought. Though if it had been the eponymously named Lovegood of the Quibbler we might see different headlines: Transfiguration Supremo makes a pig of himself at Hogs Head. 135 year old holds 'interview' with Seer in Hogsmeade 'red light' dive. In a world exclusive your reporter can reveal the explosive details of this shameful and secretive tryst. "The one with the power...." gasped Sybill Trelawney (84) overcome with emotion. "Disgusting" said Lucius Malfoy, member of the Board of Governors of the school where this insatiable beast in human form pollutes the minds of innocent children. (cont. p.9) Kneasy From hannahmarder at yahoo.co.uk Sun Nov 14 11:38:36 2004 From: hannahmarder at yahoo.co.uk (Hannah) Date: Sun, 14 Nov 2004 11:38:36 -0000 Subject: Why did the founders retain Slytherin's house? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117846 > Lupinlore wrote: > "We know that Salazar departed in a huff when the other founders > didn't agree with his pureblood policies. Why then, did the other > founders allow his House to remain part of Hogwarts." > > (snip) > > " 5) The most interesting possibility, as flypaper for Dark Wizards > and racists. They may have realized/expected that most students with > > Dark tendencies would end up in Slytherin. By allowing the House to > > continue they insured such students would be easy to spot and > > observe." > > Del replies : > Interesting. However, we then have to ask : what did they intend to do with those students, once spotted ? It's all very nice to spot the > troublesome bad seeds, but it's quite stupid to then allow them to > take root and develop. Unless they intended to *do* something to/with those Slytherins, I see no point in setting them apart. > This would open interesting theories for the future : will some of the > kids put an end to the flawed House system of Hogwarts, and rebuild > the school on another system (or another set of Houses) ? I somehow > doubt it, but that would give a nice bit of work to do to people like > Hermione. Hannah: The 'flypaper' theory is very interesting, in a sinister kind of way. A house left in place in order to identify the 25% eleven year olds most likely to be evil/ racist. I find that rather chilling, but not implausible. The problem is as Del points out, that spotting such potential students isn't a great deal of use. And there is no evidence from canon that such a system is in place, or that it is effective. Lucius Malfoy, for instance, a prime candidate for such early warning, has evidently graduated, done the whole evil henchman thing, got away scottfree, lived a very comfortable existence, and indeed been well respected and had a great deal of influence in wizard politics. The sad thing about the flypaper theory is that it's a self- fulfulling prophecy. The students in Slytherin are disliked, suspected, and, I would argue, treated worse than the other students. This, I imagine, increases the chances of them deciding to join organisations like the DE's, where they can feel they belong, get power and recognition, and maybe revenge on the system that left them feeling like outcasts throughout school. I think an important part of post-LV restructuring will be doing away with the house system as it is, and replacing it with something less devisive. Even if it's just a system of randomly allocated houses. DD himself says 'we are only as weak as we are divided.' Well, the house system at Hogwarts enables divisions between groups to be established early in the lives of young wizards, and seen as right. Someone ought to do something about it, and I agree Hermione would love the job. One of the most telling comments in canon for me, is in OotP (don't have copy on me for page number), when Hermione says it would be suspicious too many people from different houses were seen talking to each other at dinner. How very sad. Hannah From hannahmarder at yahoo.co.uk Sun Nov 14 11:56:29 2004 From: hannahmarder at yahoo.co.uk (Hannah) Date: Sun, 14 Nov 2004 11:56:29 -0000 Subject: Winky's Future In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117847 Katya wrote: > > So, is anyone else curious about the way things were left for this > poor heart-broken house elf? She was so upset when she believed > Crouch had to take care of himself, is she happier now that he's dead > and doesn't have to worry about dusting? Will she play a part in the > future or is she played out? Now that her family is dead, will she > accept one of Hermoine's malformed yarn projects? Will she ever get > over her butterbeer addiction? > Hannah: JKR has said in an interview (sorry, can't remember which one) that poor Winky will never get over her butterbeer addiction. Still, I think Winky and the other elves will have their part to play in future books. I hope that her existence improves a bit. Maybe she will fall for the charms of that elvish studmuffin Dobby? Hannah From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Sun Nov 14 14:42:50 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Sun, 14 Nov 2004 14:42:50 -0000 Subject: The length of the Pensieve Scene In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117849 curlyhornedsnorkack wrote : "What Snape was doing during the scenes before he was spotted by the Marauders was not innocent and harmless; he was being a sneak." Del replies : I'm not saying that you're definitely wrong, but that is surely quite a subversive reading of that scene. It seems quite straightforward that in the Pensieve Scene, Snape was only minding his own business (reviewing his OWL paper) when he was attacked. So can you back your allegations with canon ? Del From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Sun Nov 14 14:58:55 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Sun, 14 Nov 2004 14:58:55 -0000 Subject: Why did the founders retain Slytherin's house? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117850 Alla wrote : "Do we even know that centaurs or goblins ever wanted ANYTHING to do with human educational system? Who knows , they probably have their own schools. We don't know how discrimination against non-humans started. Was it a result of some kind of bitter war between the species? Did non-humans and humans EVER lived together not just peacefully, but as EQUALS?" Del replies : I see your point, Alla, but I also see how this point could be applied to Muggleborns. Do we know that the Muggleborns ever wanted anything to do with wizard educational system ? They do have their own Muggle schools, and they could have their own Muggleborn schools of witchcraft and wizardry. We don't really know how the discrimination against the Muggleborns started. Was it a result of some kind of bitter war between them and the wizard-borns ? (After all, there must have been a reason why Salazar Slytherin considered the Muggleborns untrustworthy). Did wizard-borns and Muggleborns ever live together not just peacefully, but as equals ? (Do they now ?) For you and I, the operative word is : human. Wizard-borns and Muggleborns are all humans. But to members of a society that differentiates not only between humans and non-humans but also between magical and non-magical folks (Muggles and wizards), the distinction between Muggleborns and other wizards can be just as fundamental as the distinction between humans and non-humans. Del From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Sun Nov 14 15:45:12 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Sun, 14 Nov 2004 15:45:12 -0000 Subject: Why did the founders retain Slytherin's house? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117851 Pippin wrote : "'Fraid so. Unless "the lot" includes werewolves and mixed race children, who seem to be conspicuously absent." Alla asked : " What do you mean by "mixed race' in this context?" Del replies : When I read Pippin's words, I thought of Fleur : 3/4 human, 1/4 Veela. With one monumental exception (Hagrid), I can't remember that we are ever told of such students at Hogwarts : students whose ancestors are not all humans. And even in Hagrid's case, I'm not sure the school Headmaster of the time (Dippet ?) knew that Hagrid was part-giant. Nobody among the students seems to have known that before Rita Skeeter's article came out, which makes me think that it was never public knowledge. It seems to me like Hagrid and/or his father might have ommitted some part of the truth in order to get Hagrid in Hogwarts. As for Lupin, we know for sure that there was a cover-up. But in Beauxbatons, they have a student who freely admits that she is part Veela. And Veelas are not even creatures originated from France. I admit that it could be a preferential treatment due to the specific powers of the Veelas, but it does raise the question of whether part-humans are accepted in Beauxbatons. The case of that school's Headmistress is interesting, though. Hagrid is apparently convinced that she is half-giant, and her reaction seems to confirm it, but still she strongly denies it. If her school was open to part-humans, she should theoretically be less inclined to hiding that part of her heritage than Hagrid is. Unless there's a specific dislike of giants, or she's personally responsible for the opening up of her school to part-humans (due to her own condition). But anyway, the matter remains : we don't know of any Hogwarts student being part-human and completely honest about it. Pippin wrote : " And what comes from the mouths of Gryffindor-educated children is hardly better than Draco's spouting, though indeed they'd never dream of saying things like that about Muggleborns. Hermione: "Don't trust him, he's a werewolf!" Ron: "Get away from me, werewolf!" Hermione: " I've never really liked horses." (referring to Firenze)" Alla wrote : " Oh, Pippin, Hermione deserves some credit though, does not she? After all she covered for Remus ever since she learned that he is werewolf. I think that even though she should not have said that, she could be excused because of fear for their lives." Del replies : But why did she cover for Lupin ? Did she do it because she was personally convinced of his trustworthiness, or did she do it because DD obviously trusted him ? I personally think that it was a mixture of "innocent until proven guilty" (but it took much less to make him guilty than it takes, say, Snape), and trust in DD's choices. Alla wrote : "Ron...hmmm. Yeah, he could be smacked more than Hermione ." Del replies : Ah, but Ron's reaction is the most interesting one ! Coupled to his reaction upon learning that Hagrid is half-giant, it illustrates Pippin's point perfectly : the WW is racist. Ron was raised in a very Muggle-tolerant home, and yet he was taught racism against the non-humans. I also find Molly's reaction in OoP interesting, when learning that her husband is sharing his hospital room with a brand-new werewolf : she's immediately scared and concerned. The woman lived with a werewolf for 2 months over the summer holidays, she's just gone back to that place, she knows from first-hand experience what it is (and isn't) to live with a werewolf, and yet she immediately gives in to racist instincts when confronted with an unknown werewolf. Alla wrote : "Yes, "I never liked horses" is very bad remark, very bad. :)" Del replies : I never understood that one ! It doesn't make any sense to me. Unless maybe JKR was precisely trying to show us that fighting racism necessitates a major change of mindset ? Hermione is patronising the House-Elves because she sees them as small, oppressed and defenseless, and yet she has no problem despising the Centaurs because they don't seem to need help. She's not truly fighting racism, she's not trying to truly change the feelings behind the attitudes. She only wants to change *one* attitude, without even trying to understand where it comes from or how it is perceived by most people on both sides. Del From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Sun Nov 14 15:57:05 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Sun, 14 Nov 2004 15:57:05 -0000 Subject: Why did the founders retain Slytherin's house? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117852 Hannah wrote : "One of the most telling comments in canon for me, is in OotP (don't have copy on me for page number), when Hermione says it would be suspicious too many people from different houses were seen talking to each other at dinner. How very sad." Del replies : It's the whole concept of having to eat with your own House that I find sad. Mealtimes should be perfect times for catching up with your friends from other Houses. I know teenagers tend to be very clanish, but the House system doesn't help them get out of that mentality. I wonder how much the House system codifies the functioning of the rest of the WW. Are we going to discover that some jobs are trusted by people from such House, or that members of a same House keep banding together in their workplace ? Del From HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com Sun Nov 14 16:02:30 2004 From: HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com (HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com) Date: 14 Nov 2004 16:02:30 -0000 Subject: Reminder - Weekly Chat Message-ID: <1100448150.103.98907.m7@yahoogroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 117853 We would like to remind you of this upcoming event. Weekly Chat Date: Sunday, November 14, 2004 Time: 11:00AM CST (GMT-06:00) Don't forget, chat happens today, 11 am Pacific, 2 pm Eastern, 7 pm UK time. Chat times do not change for Daylight Saving/Summer Time. Chat generally goes on for about 5 hours, but can last as long as people want it to last. Go into any Yahoo chat room and type: /join HP:1 Hope to see you there! From hannahmarder at yahoo.co.uk Sun Nov 14 16:20:15 2004 From: hannahmarder at yahoo.co.uk (Hannah) Date: Sun, 14 Nov 2004 16:20:15 -0000 Subject: Prejudice in the WW (was why the founders retained Slytherin) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117854 > Pippin wrote : > " And what comes from the mouths of Gryffindor-educated children is > hardly better than Draco's spouting, though indeed they'd never dream of saying things like that about Muggleborns. > > Hermione: "Don't trust him, he's a werewolf!" > Ron: "Get away from me, werewolf!" > Hermione: " I've never really liked horses." (referring to Firenze)" > > Alla wrote : > " Oh, Pippin, Hermione deserves some credit though, does not she? > After all she covered for Remus ever since she learned that he is > werewolf. I think that even though she should not have said that, she could be excused because of fear for their lives." > > Del replied : > But why did she cover for Lupin ? Did she do it because she was > personally convinced of his trustworthiness, or did she do it because DD obviously trusted him ? > I personally think that it was a mixture of "innocent until proven > guilty" (but it took much less to make him guilty than it takes, say, Snape), and trust in DD's choices. > > Alla wrote : > "Yes, "I never liked horses" is very bad remark, very bad. :)" > > Del replies : > I never understood that one ! It doesn't make any sense to me. Unless > maybe JKR was precisely trying to show us that fighting racism > necessitates a major change of mindset ? Hermione is patronising the > House-Elves because she sees them as small, oppressed and defenseless, > and yet she has no problem despising the Centaurs because they don't > seem to need help. She's not truly fighting racism, she's not trying > to truly change the feelings behind the attitudes. She only wants to > change *one* attitude, without even trying to understand where it > comes from or how it is perceived by most people on both sides. Hannah: Doesn't Hermione make the 'I don't like horses' comment when Lavender/Parvati is in raptures over Firenze's attractiveness? I'm not saying that makes it right, but I think in this context it's a dig at Parvati/Lavender for being shallow and silly, rather than a deliberately racist remark. I don't think she'd have come out with it if they'd simply been discussing Firenze as a teacher in a disspassionate way. It could be one of those times when you say something, and it comes out sounding as though you had a very different meaning to the one you intended. And we've all done that, I'm sure, not necessarily in a racist context, but in any conversation. It happens on this list, when people write things that are misconstrued as being offensive, when the poster possibly never even considered that the comment could be taken as being rude. It's the same with the werewolf comment that she makes. In addition to being under stress at that moment, that comment could be taken to mean; 'don't trust him because he's not what he seems and has already been lying by omission as he's a secret werewolf,' rather than 'don't trust him because he's a werewolf and they're all untrustworthy.' The fact that Hermione did cover for Lupin suggests that she wasn't affected by prejudice towards werewolves. I doubt Ron could have done it had he been in the position, no matter how much trust DD seemed to have in Lupin. Hannah Fanfic at www.schnoogle.com/authorLinks/Hannah_Marder/ From hannahmarder at yahoo.co.uk Sun Nov 14 16:45:33 2004 From: hannahmarder at yahoo.co.uk (Hannah) Date: Sun, 14 Nov 2004 16:45:33 -0000 Subject: Why did the founders retain Slytherin's house? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117855 > Hannah wrote : > "One of the most telling comments in canon for me, is in OotP (don't have copy on me for page number), when Hermione says it would be suspicious too many people from different houses were seen talking to each other at dinner. How very sad." > > Del replied : > It's the whole concept of having to eat with your own House that I > find sad. Mealtimes should be perfect times for catching up with your friends from other Houses. I know teenagers tend to be very clanish, but the House system doesn't help them get out of that mentality. > > I wonder how much the House system codifies the functioning of the > rest of the WW. Are we going to discover that some jobs are trusted by people from such House, or that members of a same House keep banding together in their workplace ? Hannah: Yes, I would think that they do. Look at the adults in HP. The house their child gets sorted into seems to be a big deal. Not just for Lucius Malfoy, but the Weasleys as well - Ron clearly felt under pressure to be sorted into Gryffindor. Adults don't appear to move on from their youthful house clannishness. And when the house your child enters seems to determine their character, it's not surprising. Hogwarts is the only school of wizardry in the UK. Thus the vast majority of adults in the WW will have been there and have the house mindset firmly ingrained. Imagine graduating from Hufflepuff and trying to get a high flying (no pun intended) job - you'd constantly be fighting the 'everyone says Hufflepuffs are a load of duffers' image. In some British institutions even today there is the so called 'old school tie' principle, where people from posh schools favour their cronies rather than select people on merit, although there's a lot of legislation to prevent it. You can bet your bottom dollar there's no such legislation in the WW! If your boss is an ex- Gryffindor, don't expect promotion if you graduated from Slytherin! If you're a Hufflepuff in a predominantly Ravenclaw workplace, expect to sit on your own at meals, or at least be left out of a lot of 'in-jokes'. Really, when you look at it dispassionately, the WW is a rather nasty place, a sort of charicature of the worst elements of real world society. Riddled with despotism, prejudice of every kind, and with an apparently very shaky grip on human rights, fair trials, democracy, or freedom of speech. It sounds like a prime candidate for the 'axis of evil!' Hannah From foxmoth at qnet.com Sun Nov 14 16:51:28 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Sun, 14 Nov 2004 16:51:28 -0000 Subject: Why did the founders retain Slytherin's house? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117856 > Alla wrote : > "Yes, "I never liked horses" is very bad remark, very bad. :)" > > Del replies : > I never understood that one ! It doesn't make any sense to me. Unless maybe JKR was precisely trying to show us that fighting racism necessitates a major change of mindset ? < Exactly. Muggleborn Hermione must have a whole lot of neurons associating "horse-shaped" with "beast" which unfortunately doesn't fit the reality of her new environment. She can't counter the effect because she isn't even aware of it, though the encounter at the end of OOP may have raised her consciousness somewhat. Pippin From olivier.fouquet+harry at m4x.org Sun Nov 14 17:07:04 2004 From: olivier.fouquet+harry at m4x.org (olivierfouquet2000) Date: Sun, 14 Nov 2004 17:07:04 -0000 Subject: Why did the founders retain Slytherin's house? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117857 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "pippin_999" wrote: > > > > Alla wrote : > > "Yes, "I never liked horses" is very bad remark, very bad. :)" > > > > Del replies : > > I never understood that one ! It doesn't make any sense to me. > Unless maybe JKR was precisely trying to show us that fighting > racism necessitates a major change of mindset ? < > > Exactly. Muggleborn Hermione must have a whole lot of neurons > associating "horse-shaped" with "beast" which unfortunately > doesn't fit the reality of her new environment. She can't counter > the effect because she isn't even aware of it, though the > encounter at the end of OOP may have raised her > consciousness somewhat. > > > Pippin Olivier Only me, but I read it as a subtle sex-joke, one of course that could not be explained more clearly. While the other girls fantasize about Firenze, Hermione shows cleverly that she knows why it is rather pointless to have fantasies about him. From foxmoth at qnet.com Sun Nov 14 17:10:27 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Sun, 14 Nov 2004 17:10:27 -0000 Subject: Why did the founders retain Slytherin's house? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117858 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Hannah" wrote: > Really, when you look at it dispassionately, the WW is a rather nasty place, a sort of charicature of the worst elements of real world society. Riddled with despotism, prejudice of every kind, and with an apparently very shaky grip on human rights, fair trials, democracy, or freedom of speech. It sounds like a prime candidate for the 'axis of evil!'< On the other hand, as Susan pointed out in 117831, it's a much more enlightened society about skin color , sexual orientation and gender. I sometimes wonder if Hermione doesn't feel she's escaped one glass ceiling only to smack her head into another. I think the point is that the categories we use to sort people are more artificial than we think, and our reactions to the Other are conditioned by things we cannot control. Therefore if we wish to develop a just society we must all be educated in tolerance, regardless of how open-minded we like to think we are. Pippin From foxmoth at qnet.com Sun Nov 14 17:29:27 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Sun, 14 Nov 2004 17:29:27 -0000 Subject: Why did the founders retain Slytherin's house? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117859 > > Olivier > > Only me, but I read it as a subtle sex-joke, one of course that could not be explained more clearly. While the other girls fantasize about Firenze, Hermione shows cleverly that she knows why it is rather pointless to have fantasies about him.< Erm...if a blast ended skrewt is a cross between a manticore and a fire crab and Hagrid is the offspring of a giantess and a human male...anyway, teenage girls often have crushes on unattainable males such as teachers -- it's a way to safely experiment with those feelings. Pippin who had a thing for Mr. Spock at that age From templar1112002 at yahoo.com Sun Nov 14 17:32:19 2004 From: templar1112002 at yahoo.com (templar1112002) Date: Sun, 14 Nov 2004 17:32:19 -0000 Subject: Harry taking credit for what he didnt do... In-Reply-To: <111220042015.825.419519C700018E09000003392200737478CECECCCF020E03020700009A030A089B@comcast.net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117860 TheMuffinMan wrote: > > I know this is only a small little thing, but it has always bothered me what Harry said to Draco at the end of Book 5: > > "'You're going to pay,' said Malfoy in a voice barely louder than a whisper,'I'm going to make you've done to my father...' > > 'Well, I'm terrified now,' said Harry sarcastically,'I s'pose Lord Voldemort's Just a warm up act for you three...'" > > The way Harry gloats in front of Draco, He tries to make it seem like HE fought Voldie, when really when faced with the dark lord he froze up and had to be saved by Dumbledore! I've always hated the fact that Harry said this, im not sure why, but ive kind of lost a little respect in Harry after this. SO whats everyone's opinion in this?? ******* I don't think that Harry was gloating, he was just stating a fact... Remember to take into account that Harry did face Voldemort in GoF, he stood up from behind the grave stone and used the Expelliarmus spell, with such 'luck' that it connected with Voldy's AK and we had the Priory Incantatem effect. While their wands were connected, Harry "forced" the golden bead approaching his wand to go back to Voldemort's wand, he did that with his sheer willpower. In OoTP, while its true that Harry froze when Voldy showed up and Dumbledore came to the rescue, he ultimately saved himself from Voldy's possession, again with lots of 'luck' if you want, by having feelings of filial love, hope for an end to his pain, self- sacrifice, pretty much the same feelings that showed up during the duel in GoF. (BTW, think of the pattern of Harry/Voldemort's encounters in PS, CoS, GoF and OoTP: parents, Fawkes and DD somehow involved before Harry is 'luckily' strong enough to fight Voldy). Back to your question, if I were in Harry's position, I'd most definetely think that Malfoy was a 'nobody' compared to Voldemort or even his Death Eaters. But for the sake of this debate, let's assume that Harry was indeed gloating in front of Malfoy as you say... what's wrong with that? They have been fighting and exchanging words ever since they met on the train in PS. They had had a muggle duel earlier that year, Draco had been playing with Harry's wand at Dolores' office a few days before this encounter and afterward was jinxed by his DA members, why would Harry act like he was afraid/scared of Malfoy's words? Pay attention at how JKR shows us that Harry's minor enemies or 'nobodies' can be taken care of by either the Order or the DA members... Marcela From finwitch at yahoo.com Sun Nov 14 18:05:43 2004 From: finwitch at yahoo.com (finwitch) Date: Sun, 14 Nov 2004 18:05:43 -0000 Subject: Sirius's Future In-Reply-To: <20041113.184111.4072.2.annegirl11@juno.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117861 Aura: -- No body, no death. > At least, no certain death. And portals never do what you think they do. > The whole thing was wayyy too dodgy to be a straight-out death. > > As for Sirius' future, I don't think we'll see him corporeal, fully human > again, at least not on-page. He'll be back as a portrait, or something to > do with that mirror, or in some way "a memory". Finwitch: I'm with you. Sirius is not properly dead. He went to the 'other side' in flesh. I think he IS going to be back. We don't know in which form he's going to return, but... Not a portrait, memory or mirror, I think. However, I do think Sirius did leave at least a letter and a will behind. (lots of time to write them, and what else did he have to do?) But as to in what *form* he'll be back - as a phoenix, I'd say. A phoenix with a rare ability: turning into a man. (but that only lasts until his next burning). Think I have a thing about phoenixes, I do... Finwitch From manawydan at ntlworld.com Sun Nov 14 18:43:36 2004 From: manawydan at ntlworld.com (manawydan) Date: Sun, 14 Nov 2004 18:43:36 -0000 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Why did the founders retain Slytherin's house? References: <1100395377.3883.33758.m21@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <000a01c4ca79$dc0cdaa0$704b6d51@f3b7j4> No: HPFGUIDX 117862 Allen wrote: >I believe that the primary reason the remaining founders kept the >Slytherin house was a combination of political and practical >convienence. Consider the immediate issues of closing the house once >Salazar left: >I) What to do if Salazar returned? The possibility for a >II) What to do with the students in the Slytherin house? After >III) How do you reprogram the Sorting Hat? The Hat's songs imply, if >When you consider these issues from the founder's prespective versus >some future events that they would have no knowledge of, it seems >quite reasonable that they kept the Slytherin house around. There are other possibilities too. I've argued elsewhere that possibly Slytherin withdrew from Hogwarts because the reality of teaching Muggleborn children was far outwith the original concept that the Founders had had of a school that would advance, widen and deepen the level of wizarding knowledge. Instead, most of their efforts were going into teaching peasant born children the absolute basics of how to wield a wand and the uses of fleabane. So he got fed up and pulled out, leaving his Basilisk behind him to guard the whatever it is in the Chamber of Secrets (perhaps his collected notes, writings, magical tools and devices, prophecies, whatever your imagination might want to put there). Perhaps, also, the ethos of Slytherin House was different from what it is today. Posters have often wondered about the picture that the Sorting Hat draws and the fact that Halfblood Tom Riddle was sorted in, and how that fits with today's one-dimensional crew of purista thugs. Have things changed over the years? Did the Voldemort years cause the change? Was it even earlier, under the influence of another Dark wizard? Does it date from Tom Riddle's own time, and the cause that he began? Cheers Ffred O Benryn wleth hyd Luch Reon Cymru yn unfryd gerhyd Wrion Gwret dy Cymry yghymeiri From finwitch at yahoo.com Sun Nov 14 18:52:06 2004 From: finwitch at yahoo.com (finwitch) Date: Sun, 14 Nov 2004 18:52:06 -0000 Subject: DU treatment of Trelawney In-Reply-To: <20041113044745.2682.qmail@web53101.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117863 > --- Kathleen Hunt wrote: > > I'm sorry if this has been covered in the past, but > > I would like to know if any of you have a theory on > > why Umbridge hated and picked on Trelawney? Trelawney > > mentioned that Seers have been persecuted for years, > > but why? Was Trelawney considered part human because > > of her gift? I would say no, but I don't understand > > why DU went after her. Please let me know. > > > Juli: I think the reason DU picked on Trelawney was > that she's a bad teacher, I mean she can't see the > future even if her life depended on it, sure she's > made 2 real prophecies, but I doubt DU knew anything > about them. Finwitch: I disagree with you, Juli - I'd say Trelawney can tell the future. Aside from predicting Harry (and various other living persons, acc. to McGonagall) to die (which they will do, considering that the Philosopher's Stone is gone, none of them would drink Unicorn Blood, and are probably too wise to choose immortality anyway), have any of her predictions as yet not happened? Look at her predicting that Neville would break two teacups, that one of their number would leave them before Easter (turned out to be Hermione, of whom she *correctly* said lacked the Sight), that 'thing you dread will happen'.. (I think she *did* dread of finding that her rabbit had ended up eaten - which is why she didn't bring the rabbit into a place crowded with carnivores like cats and owls). Only, the thing about her superstition - about 13 at the table - I think she was joking... or if she wasn't, with Ron&Harry leaving at the same time, there was no *the first* - so it doesn't really count. As what comes to Seers being procecuted - a Greek legend of Cassandra (the author of Unfogging the Future? or a descendant/relative?) who had the talent of Seeing, was also cursed so that none would believe her (by Apollo). Also, as Seeing is a way to find what one could not possibly know - of a crime, say - it follows to being a suspect, just because you *know*. Also, as is pointed out elsewhere, it was an indirect attack on Dumbledore, not Trelawney. Anyway, I think many people expect too much of true Seers. I think Seeing is like quantum physics and includes what is known as the uncertainty principle. Also, you can either give a few lines on the what and a quite exact WHEN - or a quite exact WHAT with much less exact when. Channeling a prophecy, OTOH, does not allow the Seer to remember the event at all, nor is she in anyway controlling it. Firenze comes right out and says so, and that the uncertainty involves *everything*; Sybilla Trelawney practises the art of Seeing, and as she knows she's given a true prophecy at least once (I'm positive Albus Dumbledore told her of it), well - we can know *something* about the future. Finwitch From foxmoth at qnet.com Sun Nov 14 19:03:45 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Sun, 14 Nov 2004 19:03:45 -0000 Subject: Sirius's Future In-Reply-To: <20041113.184111.4072.2.annegirl11@juno.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117864 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, annegirl11 at j... wrote: > Katya said: > [Some very interesting stuff that I'm snipping b/c I don't have any > specific comments on it] > > ITA. Have you depressing naysayers never watched tv? No body, no death. At least, no certain death. And portals never do what you think they do. The whole thing was wayyy too dodgy to be a straight-out death. > Pippin Oh, JKR, she knows her fans, yes she does. She dares us to ask her whether Sirius is really dead, and all the time she's laughing in her sleeve at us, because the question we *should* be asking is who killed him. I think we'll see Sirius again as a memory, but he won't be coming back from the portal, because if he did, he'd have to tell Harry who killed him. (Harry! Revenge!) As Harry is far more decisive than Hamlet, it wouldn't be much of a story I think canon will show that we *all* die with our lives unfinished, for they continue elsewhere. Not my personal belief, but that seems to be where canon is tending. . Pippin From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com Sun Nov 14 19:10:18 2004 From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (arrowsmithbt) Date: Sun, 14 Nov 2004 19:10:18 -0000 Subject: Why did the founders retain Slytherin's house? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117865 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "pippin_999" wrote: > > > > Exactly. Muggleborn Hermione must have a whole lot of neurons > associating "horse-shaped" with "beast" which unfortunately > doesn't fit the reality of her new environment. She can't counter > the effect because she isn't even aware of it, though the > encounter at the end of OOP may have raised her > consciousness somewhat. > But it is the reality. Read FBaWTFT. Centuars *refused* being status and insisted as being classified as beasts. And apart from isolated individuals like Firenze, they want nothing to do with humans, wizard or Muggle. Somewhat anti-social don't you think? Kneasy From olivier.fouquet+harry at m4x.org Sun Nov 14 19:39:18 2004 From: olivier.fouquet+harry at m4x.org (olivierfouquet2000) Date: Sun, 14 Nov 2004 19:39:18 -0000 Subject: Why did the founders retain Slytherin's house? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117866 anyway, teenage girls often have crushes on > unattainable males such as teachers -- it's a way to safely > experiment with those feelings. > Olivier Exactly, teenage girls do. But not Hermione (well she had her go in CoS). The way I read it, Hermione appears more mature than that. > Pippin > who had a thing for Mr. Spock at that age You did? Well, I still have a thing for Cho (but I consider moving to Ginny) From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Sun Nov 14 19:50:16 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Sun, 14 Nov 2004 19:50:16 -0000 Subject: Prejudice in the WW (was why the founders retained Slytherin) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117867 Hannah wrote : " Doesn't Hermione make the 'I don't like horses' comment when Lavender/Parvati is in raptures over Firenze's attractiveness? I'm not saying that makes it right, but I think in this context it's a dig at Parvati/Lavender for being shallow and silly, rather than a deliberately racist remark. I don't think she'd have come out with it if they'd simply been discussing Firenze as a teacher in a disspassionate way. " Del replies : You could be right, of course. It just doesn't feel that way to me when I read it. I would also think that Hermione is in the wrong place to criticise girls' silly reactions to attractive teachers *cough*Lockhart*cough* Hannah wrote : "The fact that Hermione did cover for Lupin suggests that she wasn't affected by prejudice towards werewolves. I doubt Ron could have done it had he been in the position, no matter how much trust DD seemed to have in Lupin." Del replies : Ron doesn't trust DD anywhere as much as Hermione did. "DD trusts Snape" is a good enough reason for Hermione to trust Snape, but not so for Ron. Del From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Sun Nov 14 20:03:36 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Sun, 14 Nov 2004 20:03:36 -0000 Subject: Why did the founders retain Slytherin's house? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117868 Olivier wrote : " Only me, but I read it as a subtle sex-joke, one of course that could not be explained more clearly. While the other girls fantasize about Firenze, Hermione shows cleverly that she knows why it is rather pointless to have fantasies about him." Pippin commented : " Erm...if a blast ended skrewt is a cross between a manticore and a fire crab and Hagrid is the offspring of a giantess and a human male..." Del replies : LOL ! The image of Parvati or Lavender being actually confronted to the practicalities of having a love affair with a Centaur makes me laugh. Though... Male horses are considered the epitome of masculinity by some people. And the idea of riding away in the sunset on the back of your Centaur lover is romantic enough, don't you think ? " Pippin who had a thing for Mr. Spock at that age" Heh, heh. I did too. By the way, Mr Spock is a half-breed too... Del From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Sun Nov 14 20:36:12 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Sun, 14 Nov 2004 20:36:12 -0000 Subject: Why did the founders retain Slytherin's house? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117869 Kneasy wrote : " Centuars *refused* being status and insisted as being classified as beasts. And apart from isolated individuals like Firenze, they want nothing to do with humans, wizard or Muggle. Somewhat anti-social don't you think?" Del replies : Oh, absolutely ! But should that influence the way wizards see them ? If I remember well, they refused the being status because they didn't want to be associated with some other species that had been granted the being status. Am I right ? If I am, then they were being quite racist. That doesn't mean that other people should follow their lead. Moreover, the beast and being status seem to me to be quite muddy to start with. What was the point of it ? What was it needed for ? Instead of arbitrarily grouping species into two camps according to rules that don't always make sense, why not deal with those species individually, on the basis of their own specificities ? The way I see it, classifying the different species into beasts and beings was just a way to officially determine who were the leaders and who were the followers, in the eyes of the *wizards*, who were the ones who wanted to rule the others to start with. In this case, it makes sense that both the Centaurs and the Merpeople backed out of the being status, since they apparently have no desire to rule other species. The wizards have a problem : they are intelligent and magical, but they are not the only ones. Muggles don't have that problem : they are the only ones with that level of intelligence and that degree of sentience in their world. But wizards are confronted to species that are their equal in everything except one thing : the desire to rule the world. So they try to find ways to justify their taking over the world without making it sound like they are overstepping their limits. A bit like Westerners a few centuries ago were trying to take over the world without having it look like they were only would-be tyrants. So they pretended (and often believed) that it was for the good of other people, that they were bringing them civilisation and enlightenment, that those people were savage and self-destructive anyway, and so on. Except that we are discovering now that those cultures that were nearly or completely annihilated actually had a lot of good in them, even if they were vastly different from the Western culture. Most wizards are very satisfied with the actual WW, governed by wizards only, and served by other species (House-Elves, Goblins). They don't care about respecting those other cultures, they just take them for inherently inferior. They are indeed profoundly racist, and this is bound to spill over in their relationships with each other too. The anti-Muggleborn racism and pure-blood ideology are just a way of trying to determine who should rule and who should serve among the wizards. Wizards rule the other species, but who should rule among the wizards ? Del From catlady at wicca.net Sun Nov 14 21:16:18 2004 From: catlady at wicca.net (Catlady (Rita Prince Winston)) Date: Sun, 14 Nov 2004 21:16:18 -0000 Subject: Lupin, Prince, Grubbly-Plank, Levi-Strauss, Kreachur, Dark Lord / Transfigur Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117870 I thought I had replied previously to Pippin's theory that there is no such thing as a werewolf cub but rather even the youngest infant who contracts lycanthropy turns into a full-grown werewolf, but I can't find that reply using Y!Mort's search. So here it is again: I can't imagine a pre-pubescent child turning into a full-grown wolf. I understand that the werewolf cub wouldn't be "adorable"; at least if it scented human, it would go into the same desperate rage/hunger compulsion to attack humans, and it would be just as infectious and have sharp fangs. But it might be a little less physically strong, thus less likely to fight through the chains that confine it for the protection of humans. While I was looking for something else, I stumbled upon the Lupin quote, and found that it includes *both* 'great man' and 'nice man': http://www.quick-quote-quill.org/articles/2003/062 6-alberthall-fry.htm : << when I created Professor Lupin who has a condition that is contagious of course and so people are very frightened of him and I really like Professor Lupin, the character, because he's somebody who also has his failing he's such a great man and he's a wonderful teacher in fact I would say that Lupin is the one time I've written a teacher I loved really liked to have had because Professor McGonnagol is a very good teacher but she can be quite scary at times, very strict. So Lupin's a wonderful teacher and a very nice man but he has a failing and his failing is that he does like to be liked and that's where he slips up because he has been disliked so often that he's always so pleased to have friends so he cuts them and awful lot of slack. >> Ginger, http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/117470 : << wondering if our own Catlady is really a full Muggle ;o) >> *big smile* The late Bruce Pelz once asked if my brother and I had the same middle name (it was my mother's mother's maiden name) because we were named after a large friendly dog that we hoped would leave us a fortune. Eustace_Scrubb, http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/117473 : << Professor Grubbly-Plank serving both as a short-term and long-term substitute for Hagrid (wonder what she's up to when not substituting?); >> She must have some profession that involves Caring for Magical Creatures. Maybe she's a veterinarian for magical creatures (she treated Hedwig's wounded wing). Maybe she's a pet-sitter. I'd like to think that one thing you could do with a NEWT in CMC is go into the Pest Control business -- people would owl you for help when they found Chizpurfles or Bundiums or an Ashwinder trail in their house. But there doesn't seem to be room for private enterprise in that field -- FB keeps referring to Department for the Regulation and Control of Magical Creatures (Pest Sub-Division). I suppose that if Grubbly-Plank worked there, she couldn't take time off for a temp job at Hogwarts. Maybe she has retired from there. Pippin, http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/117550 : << Why not regard the whole kit'n'caboodle -- text, promos, chats, website, films and legosets etc. --- as a multimedia work? >> Isn't that the Claude Levi-Strauss theory? DuffyPoo, http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/117645 : << I don't think the hands are bandaged because he had to punish himself over thebetrayal, at all. I think Beaky bit him. I don't know why Beaky didn't eat him...would have saved all this trouble. ;) >> But it might have poisoned poor Beaky. Potioncat, http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/117766 : << Dark Lord? Was the keeper of the Hall a (former) Death Eater? DD doesn't tell us what the label said before. >> Didn't someone (Kneasy?) already suggest that the Prophecy was so labelled because of uncertainty as to *which* Dark Lord it referred? Connected, perhaps, to the 'possession' theory. Mimbeltonia, http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGr ownups/message/117656 : << Cedric Diggory was transfiguring a rock into a living dog etc. etc. >> That reminds me -- it seems that the students do a lot of transfiguring between living and inanimate things. Your example of Cedric transfiguring a rock into a dog goes along with the class exercise of transfiguring a teapot into a tortoise. (And there was also hedgehog into pincushion. Does transfiguring a living creature into an inanimate object kill it?) Does transfiguing an inanimate object into a living creature *create* a life, a confusing metaphysical act which usually only God(s) and messy biological processes are believed able to do? Or is the so-called living creature really a robot made of meat? From hannahmarder at yahoo.co.uk Sun Nov 14 21:31:24 2004 From: hannahmarder at yahoo.co.uk (Hannah) Date: Sun, 14 Nov 2004 21:31:24 -0000 Subject: Sirius's Future In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117871 > > Katya said: > > [Some very interesting stuff that I'm snipping b/c I don't have > any > > specific comments on it] > > > > ITA. Have you depressing naysayers never watched tv? No > body, no death. At least, no certain death. And portals never do > what you think they do. The whole thing was wayyy too dodgy to > be a straight-out death. > > > > Pippin > Oh, JKR, she knows her fans, yes she does. She dares us to > ask her whether Sirius is really dead, and all the time she's > laughing in her sleeve at us, because the question we *should* > be asking is who killed him. > > I think we'll see Sirius again as a memory, but he won't be > coming back from the portal, because if he did, he'd have to tell > Harry who killed him. (Harry! Revenge!) As Harry is far more > decisive than Hamlet, it wouldn't be much of a story > > I think canon will show that we *all* die with our lives unfinished, > for they continue elsewhere. Not my personal belief, but that > seems to be where canon is tending. > . > Pippin Hannah: I just love that, Pippin! I'm not sure about the continuing elsewhere bit either, but definitely about dying with our lives unfinished. With Sirius, JKR wanted to show just that. Why does everyone want and hope (and in some cases believe) that Sirius will be back? Because so much is left undone, because his death is so sudden, so abrupt, so untimely. And that is just why I believe he's not going to be back. He's not just going to nip back from beyond the veil to tie up all the loose ends, because life (and death) isn't like that, and I think that's what JKR is trying to tell us. There are many ways we can see and hear about Sirius without him having to return. A letter left by him, pensieve scenes, the memories of his friends... I know a lot of people will be disappointed if he doesn't return, but I for one will feel a bit miffed if he *does*. As for who killed him... puppetmaster!DD. That guy has a lot to answer for. I wonder what Sirius would have made of the prophecy? Did he know about it, or exactly what it said? I can't imagine he'd have been happy about letting Harry go along with it. Maybe he had become too much of a liability to the masterplan for DD to pass up such a good opportunity to blast him through the veil and blame it all on Bella. Hannah, ducking assorted rotten veg thrown by DD fans. From foxmoth at qnet.com Sun Nov 14 21:55:40 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Sun, 14 Nov 2004 21:55:40 -0000 Subject: Lupin, Prince, Grubbly-Plank, Levi-Strauss, Kreachur, Dark Lord / Transfigur In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117872 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Catlady (Rita Prince Winston)" wrote: > > I thought I had replied previously to Pippin's theory that there is no such thing as a werewolf cub but rather even the youngest infant who contracts lycanthropy turns into a full-grown werewolf, but I can't find that reply using Y!Mort's search. So here it is again: > > I can't imagine a pre-pubescent child turning into a full-grown wolf. > > I understand that the werewolf cub wouldn't be "adorable"; at least if it scented human, it would go into the same desperate rage/hunger compulsion to attack humans, and it would be just as infectious and have sharp fangs. But it might be a little less physically strong, thus less likely to fight through the chains that confine it for theprotection of humans. > Pippin: I'm not sure I understand why this is difficult to imagine. Trevor can become a tadpole, and Peter Pettigrew can become a rat, so neither physical age nor mass need be conserved. Rita: > While I was looking for something else, I stumbled upon the Lupinquote, and found that it includes *both* 'great man' and 'nice man': > http://www.quick-quote-quill.org/articles/2003/062 > 6-alberthall-fry.htm : > > << when I created Professor Lupin who has a condition that is contagious of course and so people are very frightened of him and I really like Professor Lupin, the character, because he's somebody who also has his failing he's such a great man and he's a wonderful teacher in fact I would say that Lupin is the one time I've written a teacher I loved really liked to have had because Professor McGonnagol is a very good teacher but she can be quite scary at times, very strict. So Lupin's a wonderful teacher and a very nice man but he has a failing and his failing is that he does like to be liked and that's where he slips up because he has been disliked so often that he's always so pleased to have friends so he cuts them and awful lot of slack. >> Pippin: You know, I'm beginning to wonder if JKR isn't feeling a tad guilty over Lupin. She probably does wish he were a real person, because a) she could rescue him from the wizarding world, the way she rescued Harry from the Dursleys, and b) he'd have free will and wouldn't have to make the choices that she has ordained for him. All those buckets of tears she says she's wept over killing Cedric and Sirius -- could they have been for the killer, as well as the victims? Pippin From dontask2much at yahoo.com Sun Nov 14 21:56:57 2004 From: dontask2much at yahoo.com (charme) Date: Sun, 14 Nov 2004 16:56:57 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Sirius's Future References: Message-ID: <004c01c4ca94$df34b340$6901a8c0@Cassidy> No: HPFGUIDX 117873 First, Pippin: >>Oh, JKR, she knows her fans, yes she does. She dares us to > > ask her whether Sirius is really dead, and all the time she's > > laughing in her sleeve at us, because the question we *should* > > be asking is who killed him. and then Hannah: > > As for who killed him... puppetmaster!DD. That guy has a lot to > answer for. I wonder what Sirius would have made of the prophecy? > Did he know about it, or exactly what it said? I can't imagine he'd > have been happy about letting Harry go along with it. Maybe he had > become too much of a liability to the masterplan for DD to pass up > such a good opportunity to blast him through the veil and blame it > all on Bella. > Charme: I agree with Pippin that the main question is who *did* kill Sirius; it's rather vague in canon and flows with his duel with Bella, however it certainly isn't clear at all. It does make me wonder about "friendly fire" - we all know it happens in a real battle so why wouldn't it happen in a multiple wizard duel? I also note that while there's much written in the DoM scene with other participants in the battle, there isn't as much about Lupin until *after* Sirius is hit. I should wonder what that lack of detail should tell us? charme From jlnbtr at yahoo.com Sun Nov 14 20:07:05 2004 From: jlnbtr at yahoo.com (Juli) Date: Sun, 14 Nov 2004 12:07:05 -0800 (PST) Subject: Trelawney - real seer or not? (was Re: DU treatment of Trelawney) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041114200705.56443.qmail@web53105.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 117874 > Finwitch: > I disagree with you, Juli - I'd say Trelawney can > tell the future. Aside from predicting Harry (and > various other living persons, acc. to McGonagall) > to die (which they will do, considering that the > Philosopher's Stone is gone, none of them would > drink Unicorn Blood, and are probably too wise to > choose immortality anyway), have any of her > predictions as yet not happened? > > Look at her predicting that Neville would break two > teacups, that one of their number would leave them > before Easter (turned out to be Hermione, of whom > she *correctly* said lacked the Sight), that 'thing > you dread will happen'.. I think Trelawney just plays with the odds, we know Neville always breaks thing, so why wouldn't he break it? Besides, if someone tells you "careful with that" you'll propably break it. I can't help myself, but I remeber when she tells Harry he must have been born in the middle of the winter, that's just so funny. Sure seers have always been chased, but so have witches, I think it's for the same reason, people are afraid of what they don't know. I don't think a seer in the WW is thought as a problem, they are seers just like others are metamorphus. As for the 'you will die' prophecy, you don't have to be a seer to know that, I can honestly tell you that you will die, I can't tell you when, but most certainly you WILL die. I don't think she ever jokes, she may be a joke but she never makes fun of anyone, she believes her prophecies are real, and she expects people to believe her, but nobody ever does, and why should they, she gets thing right sometimes, but just because it's a coincidence. I could tell Harry right now that he will be in great danger, not cause I'm a seer, but I look back at history and he oftens finds himself in dangerous situations, so odds are he will be again. Juli From dontask2much at yahoo.com Sun Nov 14 22:17:12 2004 From: dontask2much at yahoo.com (charme) Date: Sun, 14 Nov 2004 17:17:12 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Trelawney - real seer or not? (was Re: DU treatment of Trelawney) References: <20041114200705.56443.qmail@web53105.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <006301c4ca97$b17a6f00$6901a8c0@Cassidy> No: HPFGUIDX 117875 From: "Juli" > > I can't help myself, but I remeber when she tells > Harry he must have been born in the middle of the > winter, that's just so funny. > Charme: Funny, but perhaps foreshadowing by JKR. If the theorists who proclaim that a part of TR is in Harry as a result of LV trying to kill him at GH, they could have more support should we discover that TR was born in the middle of winter. :) charme From nrenka at yahoo.com Sun Nov 14 22:19:32 2004 From: nrenka at yahoo.com (nrenka) Date: Sun, 14 Nov 2004 22:19:32 -0000 Subject: Lupin, (him only, really) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117876 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "pippin_999" wrote: > Pippin: > You know, I'm beginning to wonder if JKR isn't feeling a tad guilty > over Lupin. She probably does wish he were a real person, > because a) she could rescue him from the wizarding world, the > way she rescued Harry from the Dursleys, and b) he'd have free > will and wouldn't have to make the choices that she has > ordained for him. > > All those buckets of tears she says she's wept over killing Cedric > and Sirius -- could they have been for the killer, as well as the > victims? Forgive me if you've answered this elsewhere, Pippin, but it sprang to mind as a good case of the question about JKR lying vs. JKR tricking us: As I'm sure you know, and has been posted, umm, a while ago, JKR gave a 'that's right' to the person who asked if Wormtail killed Cedric with Voldemort's wand. Not an "Umm, I don't think so", but a very straightfoward confirmation. I seem to remember the postulation of two Wormtails, although I'll be mighty surprised if Remus Lupin is also called Wormtail, for some odd reason. Not quite the same instance as two Lestrange brothers, after all. But. If ESE!Lupin is *actually* the killer, has not JKR lied to us? As in, flat out lie, lead us deliberately astray in a way not accomodated by nuance, with no kinds of qualifiers like could possibly be inserted into her continually positive character descriptions of Lupin? Lupin not killing Cedric doesn't torpedo the entire theory, of course, but it seems to me like a slightly ridiculous point to hold onto in the face of authorial commentary. -Nora goes back to idly working on papers From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Sun Nov 14 23:53:03 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Sun, 14 Nov 2004 23:53:03 -0000 Subject: Sirius's Future In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117877 > Pippin > Oh, JKR, she knows her fans, yes she does. She dares us to > ask her whether Sirius is really dead, and all the time she's > laughing in her sleeve at us, because the question we *should* > be asking is who killed him. Alla: I know the answer, Pippin, really, I do. :o) Lupin, of course. :o) But he just pretended to do that to sent Sirius far far away for some unknown mission with Dumbledore's knowledge, of course. He'll be back and will tell us that Lupin is really just a nice werewolf and at the end Snape will improve Wolsbane so much that it will help to cure all werewolves. :o) How is that for a theory? :) Seriously though, not dead, not dead, not dead. :) From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Sun Nov 14 23:59:16 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Sun, 14 Nov 2004 23:59:16 -0000 Subject: Why did the founders retain Slytherin's house? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117878 > Del replies : snip. > For you and I, the operative word is : human. Wizard-borns and > Muggleborns are all humans. But to members of a society that > differentiates not only between humans and non-humans but also between > magical and non-magical folks (Muggles and wizards), the distinction > between Muggleborns and other wizards can be just as fundamental as > the distinction between humans and non-humans. > Alla: Ummm, sorry, but that was not exactly my point. I am perfectly WILLING to admit that the treatment of non-humans is not just bad (which I am saying right now), but also very racist. All what I was saying is that we don't have enough information to state with certainty that attitude against non-humans is racist. We know that at least now muggle-borns want to be in WW, because we see them in Hogwarts, on the other hand as Kneasy stated centaurs don't want ANYTHING to do with humans at all. We don't know what goblins' position is and of course house-elves encantment definitely looks like slavery, but could be something different. Again, my only point is that some pieces of information are missing still, nothing more. From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Mon Nov 15 00:20:11 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2004 00:20:11 -0000 Subject: Why did the founders retain Slytherin's house? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117879 Alla wrote : " We know that at least now muggle-borns want to be in WW," Del replies : Do we, really ? Yes we see some Muggleborn kids coming to Hogwarts. But : 1. We don't know how many of the Muggleborns invited to Hogwarts actually come. 2. We don't know what are their motivations for coming. It seemed like the obvious choice to Hermione and Justin, but we don't know why (obvious according to what ?) Maybe some Muggle parents are simply happy to find a cheap boarding school. It's still not clear whether Hogwarts students have to pay a fee. They do have to pay for their equipment, but we don't know what the rate of Pounds-to-Galleons is, it could be very advantageous. And the Muggleborns would still need equipment if they went to a Muggle school anyway. 3. We don't know how many Muggleborns remain in the WW after graduation. 4. The Hogwarts education actually prevents Muggleborns from going back to the Muggle world, for at least 2 reasons : - it doesn't train them in anything necessary to live in the Muggle world - it subconsciously teaches them that being a wizard is being better than a Muggle, and that life is better in the WW than in the MW. Considering all this, I'd say that the Muggleborns cannot really choose whether or not they want to associate with the wizards. Alla wrote : " Again, my only point is that some pieces of information are missing still, nothing more." Del replies : And I'm just pointing that there are even more missing pieces than we usually think. Del From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Mon Nov 15 00:26:55 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2004 00:26:55 -0000 Subject: Why did the founders retain Slytherin's house? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117880 > Del replies : snip. > Considering all this, I'd say that the Muggleborns cannot really > choose whether or not they want to associate with the wizards. Alla: Now you really really lost me. Are you saying that muggleborns would prefer not to come to Hogwarts at all? That they would be happier if they won't discover their abilities? I don't understand. In my opriginal post I was saying that it is easier to see that attitude against muggle-borns is racist as opposed to attitude against non-humans for the simple reason that they could have chose on their own not to associate with human wisards, ALL of them, muggleborns and purebloods alike. > Del replies : > And I'm just pointing that there are even more missing pieces than we > usually think. > Alla: Of course, I am just saying that we have more information misssing in non-humans v humans puzzle as opposed to muggleborns v purebloods puzzle. > Del From foxmoth at qnet.com Mon Nov 15 01:06:13 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2004 01:06:13 -0000 Subject: Lupin, (him only, really) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117881 Nora: > Forgive me if you've answered this elsewhere, Pippin, but it sprang to mind as a good case of the question about JKR lying vs. JKR tricking us: > > As I'm sure you know, and has been posted, umm, a while ago, JKR gave a 'that's right' to the person who asked if Wormtail killed Cedric with Voldemort's wand. Not an "Umm, I don't think so", but a very straightfoward confirmation. I seem to remember the postulation of two Wormtails, although I'll be mighty surprised if Remus Lupin is also called Wormtail, for some odd reason. Not quite the same instance as two Lestrange brothers, after all.< Pippin: If Remus is also called Wormtail, then JKR has not lied, she's hidden behind a double meaning. She is, after all, the person who had Dobby explain that telling Harry the diary plot didn't have anything to do with "He Who Must Not Be Named" was supposed to be a clue. Underneath all the twists, turns and supernatural trappings beats the heart of a fair-play mystery, or so I contend. It wouldn't be fair if JKR didn't reveal to us the kinds of tricks she uses. But she has given us fair warning. Cases of double, mistaken and secret identity begin in Book One and continue throughout, so I would be very surprised if the denouement of the series does not involve a secret identity of some kind. Lupin had two secret identities exposed in PoA: Marauder and werewolf , which seemed to explain everything that Harry wondered about him. But there are a number of things that have yet to be explained -- the peeling letters on the case, the inconvenient timing of his transformation in PoA, the twelve year gap in his history, the ambiguous description of his boggart, his apparent failure to perform the riddikulus spell successfully, his absence from Harry's christening, the mysterious business for the order, and the reason that Lucius Malfoy did not attack him when he leaped in front of Harry and Neville at the DoM, to mention just a few. The answer to all of this does not have to involve a secret identity, but that's usually been the case. It is JKR's favorite device for concealing motive. (I know there may be innocent explanations for all these things. The point is, they have to be invented. They're not in the books.) Secret identity is also, according to JKR the genesis of the series. Harry Potter came into her mind as the wizard boy who did not know who or what he was. It makes the solution so much more elegant if Lupin did all the killings, because they are thematically linked. The splayed body of the unicorn and the spread eagled body of Cedric, Cedric's look of surprise and Sirius's shock as he falls through the veil. It's elegant if they both look surprised because they recognized their killer and it was someone they did not expect. Pippin From nrenka at yahoo.com Mon Nov 15 01:25:10 2004 From: nrenka at yahoo.com (nrenka) Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2004 01:25:10 -0000 Subject: Lupin, (him only, really) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117882 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "pippin_999" wrote: > Pippin: > If Remus is also called Wormtail, then JKR has not lied, she's > hidden behind a double meaning. She is, after all, the person > who had Dobby explain that telling Harry the diary plot didn't > have anything to do with "He Who Must Not Be Named" was > supposed to be a clue. I'm still getting hung up on one thing. So far, I don't think you've given a deeply compelling reason for why Remus Lupin, Moony, werewolf, would be called Wormtail, and dealt with the canonical existence of the actual Wormtail. It doesn't make sense unless it's highly artifical and deliberate obfuscation on the part of Voldemort. We have very good reasons to call Peter Wormtail, Voldemort uses that name for him (decreasing his human status in doing it), and it's on the Map. But every 'reason' for calling Lupin that frankly creates more questions of the 'buh?' kind than elegant realizations about the actual thematic meaning of his supposed actions. And, well, none of them are actually in the text, either, unlike good Peter there. > But there are a number of things that have yet to be explained -- > the peeling letters on the case, the inconvenient timing of his > transformation in PoA, the twelve year gap in his history, the > ambiguous description of his boggart, his apparent failure to > perform the riddikulus spell successfully, his absence from > Harry's christening, the mysterious business for the order, and > the reason that Lucius Malfoy did not attack him when he leaped > in front of Harry and Neville at the DoM, to mention just a few. Well, the christening absence has been explained by JKR as *only* the parents and the godfather being there--which indicates that Sirius was closer to the Potters than Lupin was. This fits, no? I agree certainly that we do not 'know' Lupin well at all, but my hunches also put some of the things that we consider 'suspicious' down to writing style and/or plot demands. (Re: Lucius Malfoy, I'm wary of arguing from absence to actuality in that case--it could be meaningful, or it could just be JKR not describing the actions taken because her focus and thus the narrator's is swinging another place.) > The answer to all of this does not have to involve a secret > identity, but that's usually been the case. It is JKR's favorite > device for concealing motive. (I know there may be innocent > explanations for all these things. The point is, they have to be > invented. They're not in the books.) I think my contention would be in many cases that the more innocent explanations are more straightforward and easy to draw, and therefore in *some* cases, not all, more likely to be right. It's the ones where they aren't that she hits us with--but make everything work like that, and it loses its impact. There are a lot of things that JKR just assumes we'll 'get'. How Harry got the map back so he could have it in OotP is a particularly good example. All kinds of fun speculation, and she's like "Oh, I assumed you all would have figured that out--sorry...". It's the game to guess which things are hiding other things, and which aren't-- but the more things you have to suppose are hiding, the more your castle ends up being built on air and connecting its foundations to itself, rather than down to the ground. ESE!Lupin is certainly possible. But making Lupin into the murderer for all those murders requires building extrapolations onto extrapolations. It's rather like a house of cards, except maybe the top half will turn out to be solid, and it's the bottom that will crash... -Nora should really be writing on decidedly non-conspiratorial subjects From annegirl11 at juno.com Mon Nov 15 00:36:55 2004 From: annegirl11 at juno.com (annegirl11 at juno.com) Date: Sun, 14 Nov 2004 19:36:55 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Sirius's Future Message-ID: <20041114.223746.432.8.annegirl11@juno.com> No: HPFGUIDX 117883 Finwitch said: > But as to in what *form* he'll be back - as a phoenix, I'd say. A > phoenix with a rare ability: turning into a man. (but that only > lasts until his next burning). Aiiee!!! I LOVE THIS!! Best. wild. theory. ever. I'm now over Remus/bird!Sirius fic. :) Kidding, kidding. ("Where's your boyfriend?" "Oh, I keep him in his cage this time of the month.") So, you're idea is that Sirius is like a phoenix animagi? But burns every however-often? So he'd have to be an infant/chick for a good part of his life. Gawddd that would be such an awesome character to write. Finwitch: > I'm with you. Sirius is not properly dead. He went to the 'other > side' in flesh. If you're into fanfic, there's a kickass fanfic that expounds on this idea, "The Elemental Trilogy" by Edna Krabapple: http://www.livejournal.com/users/shacking_up/24708.html. And, erm, I loved it so much that I wrote a sequal. You don't havta read it, but if you liked the first, maybe out of completion, : http://www.livejournal.com/community/remusxsirius/592545.html Thanks for agreeing with me. I usually get flamed when I try to explain why I don't think Sirius is properly dead. :) I admit it is contrary to what JKR's said in interviews -- but like she's going to tip her hand? Between misdirection and plain ole human error, I only believe half of what the author says. :) Aura ~*~ "What he didn't like about heroes was that they were usually suicidally gloomy when sober and homicidally insane when drunk." - Discword http://archive.skyehawke.com/authors.php?no=606 From annegirl11 at juno.com Sun Nov 14 23:58:52 2004 From: annegirl11 at juno.com (annegirl11 at juno.com) Date: Sun, 14 Nov 2004 18:58:52 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: racism, sexism and sexual orientation in OoP and the rest of the Potterverse Message-ID: <20041114.223746.432.7.annegirl11@juno.com> No: HPFGUIDX 117884 DD said: > Sirius and Remus would do quite nicely. And how! > And I agree there are hints in OOP, which can be interpreted as > Remus and Sirius being a couple (them giving a gift to Harry > together, Remus always being At Grimmauld Place etc.) Not just Remus being at GP, but how he acts there. Little things that I won't go into, but if anyone's curious, here's an explanation of all the evidnce in OOtP and PoA: http://www.livejournal.com/users/elwing_alcyone/11152.html Note: No one's saying that R/S *is* explicit canon. The best we shippers can say is that there isn't anything specifically supporting or denying it. > We also have the quote from JKR that "Sirius was too busy being a > rebel to get married" Could it be that she also hints that he was > gay? In my mind? Totally. "Rebel" has been code word for "gay," in various contexts, for ages. And yet: > why can't we see non-explicit gay romance also? It's just not gonna happen. As much as I don't think JKR is actively debunking R/S -- because I think she knows it's in her best interest to let the fans have their fun -- I don't see her supporting it, either. Plus, gay characters, when a large readership are American kids with American parents, and the US is [snip political commentary, you know what I'm talking about] wouldn't be wise. It's just not gonna happen. I'd rather my OTP be ignored than debunked, so I'm content with the current equilibrium between JKR and the R/S shippers. Aura ~*~ "What he didn't like about heroes was that they were usually suicidally gloomy when sober and homicidally insane when drunk." - Discword http://archive.skyehawke.com/authors.php?no=606 From annegirl11 at juno.com Sun Nov 14 23:38:40 2004 From: annegirl11 at juno.com (annegirl11 at juno.com) Date: Sun, 14 Nov 2004 18:38:40 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Why did the founders retain Slytherin's house? Message-ID: <20041114.223746.432.6.annegirl11@juno.com> No: HPFGUIDX 117885 Pippin said: > Since he was such a good friend of Godric Gryffindor, he probably wasn't > evil to begin with. Whoaaa. Trippy, man. I'm now imagning the Founders as 11th century Marauders! Godric as James, Peter as Salazar, Sirius as Rowena, and (out of process of elimination, I must confess) Remus as Helga. ("Helga took the rest" = Remus' loyalty? Oh, whatever, not the point.) Friends and comrads at the start, but one of them was corrupted by evil, and it busted their friendship apart. Possibly got some or all of them killed. Destroyed the thing they worked so hard for, destoryed their camelot! > No doubt Salazar > believed that he, being of nature's nobility, was too noble to be > corrupted by it. This is an interesting comment on magic, power, and corruption. Imo, "evil" or "dark magic" or what have you is a popular lit device because it doesn't have to be an "evil overlord" who uses dark magic. The idea is that evil/dark magic always taps into the darkest side of a person; people have the potential to be good or bad. Imo, Peter Pettigrew wasn't evil, he was weak; he saw the dark tide rising, and when someone approached him to draw him to V's side, Peter didn't have the strength to say no. Salazar, thinking he was on top of the world, being of the four most powerful and influential wizards of his age, may have thought that he could manipulate powerful dark magic without it touching him. > But Salazar left because he wanted *all* the houses to adopt his > purebloods only policy Sounds like extreme egotism. He was hopped up on so much dark magic at that point, he thought he was better than his co-founders. He couldn't even entertain the possibility that their points of view could be more correct than his. Of course, I'm sure there was a whole political situation going on in the background, spurring this on. > So when Slytherin left, did he take all his students with him? I > doubt it. Hmm, that's a good point. If he had taken his students, there would be a second dark magic school and Hogwarts would be one house less. It's starting to look like Salazar himself left (went uber-evil and was killed by his friends? caused a war? left in a huff and is waiting in a cave in Avalon to make his return? went mad and died of natural, pathetic causes?) and the other three kept his house, for whatever reason. BTW, ITA that sorting kids into Slytherine is to keep an eye on them. It's not giving up on them at all, it's taking the kids with the highest risk factors and keeping an eye on them. Unfortunatly, I'm not convinced the current head of house is doing his job in keeping an eye on the potential problem kids. Aura ~*~ "What he didn't like about heroes was that they were usually suicidally gloomy when sober and homicidally insane when drunk." - Discword http://archive.skyehawke.com/authors.php?no=606 From annegirl11 at juno.com Mon Nov 15 03:35:20 2004 From: annegirl11 at juno.com (annegirl11 at juno.com) Date: Sun, 14 Nov 2004 22:35:20 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Sirius's Future Message-ID: <20041114.223746.432.10.annegirl11@juno.com> No: HPFGUIDX 117886 Hannah said: >Why does > everyone want and hope (and in some cases believe) that Sirius will > be back? Because so much is left undone, because his death is so > sudden, so abrupt, so untimely. Yes. Except I don't think JKR pulled it off. She meant that Sirius' death was supposed to be a 'real death', ie a death without purpose or meaning. I wasn't at all convinced that Sirius' death was 'real' so much as contrived. If this was the point JKR was trying to make, she could have done it in a better, more examined, relevant way. I'm going to make an extreme statement here: Sirius' death was bad writing. Because: 1. Sirius' story is so ridiculously, over-the-top tragic that killing him at the pit of his depression -- rather than working with the problems in the character -- is a cop-out. It's soapy, it's lazy writing, and it's a waste of a complex, interesting character. 2. Sirius' character arc wasn't finished. When Sirius was young, he was a brilliant wizard, an important order member, devoted friend, and, if you will, imperfect boyfriend. As a man, post-Azkaban, he's emotionally immature and depressed. And then he dies. His character arc was cut off in mid-swing. Sirius was presented as a troubled character, except his troubles were never resolved. (Note: resolution doesn't mean fixing the problems; but it also doesn't mean sticking him in stasis in his family home and never letting him grow beyond who he was when we first met him.) 3. There is a HUGE well of character development that Sirius could have provided Harry. Development that, I think, would have done a lot more for Harry than turning him into Caps!Lock typical whiny teen. All Harry did in Foot was be isolated and angry; 15 is an important year in a kid's life, but Harry showed no growth whatsoever. (Even his one triumph, the DA, was overshadowed by Hermione.) 4. The writing in Foot, particularly towards the end, is not JKR's best. It's just not good. How many of you were confused with the whole MM scene? I know I was, and others have agreed with me. Whether the author was rushed, bored, burned out, distracted, whatever, the end of that book is not well done. The point I'm trying to make is that if JKR had a plan for the significance of Sirius' death, she didn't pull it off. As a reader, I was not convinced that Sirius' death was "real," or that it impacted Harry in some positive, life-lesson way. Cedric's death impacted me in a dramatic way; Sirius' was contrived and obvious. I've been in fandom for a long time, and experience has shown me that sometimes you have to accept that writers fuck up. They're human. This is their job, and not everyone performs 100% all the time at work. JKR is a brilliant storyteller and is worth all her fame and accolades. But this particular plot point in this particular book wasn't her best work. So I'm angry. I love this character. If I felt like he had died for a dramatically relevant reason, I'd be satisfied. But he didn't. So, like all the other times writers do things that just don't make sense, I'm refusing to accept it. Aura ~*~ "What he didn't like about heroes was that they were usually suicidally gloomy when sober and homicidally insane when drunk." - Discword http://archive.skyehawke.com/authors.php?no=606 [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Mon Nov 15 03:48:19 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2004 03:48:19 -0000 Subject: racism, sexism and sexual orientation in OoP and the rest of the Potterverse In-Reply-To: <20041114.223746.432.7.annegirl11@juno.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117887 Aura: > It's just not gonna happen. As much as I don't think JKR is actively > debunking R/S -- because I think she knows it's in her best interest to > let the fans have their fun -- I don't see her supporting it, either. Alla: Oh, but you see there is such thing as "silent admission" and I think that this could be the case. You know, she is not explicitly denying it, so maybe she agreeing with it? :o) Aura: snip. I'd > rather my OTP be ignored than debunked, so I'm content with the current > equilibrium between JKR and the R/S shippers. Alla: Well, true, but didn't we agree that she is doing a little bit more than simply ignoring it? Of course it is not explicit at all, but we can dream, can we? :) From witchypooh67 at yahoo.com Mon Nov 15 01:08:05 2004 From: witchypooh67 at yahoo.com (witchypooh67) Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2004 01:08:05 -0000 Subject: Sirius's Future In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117888 > > > Pippin > > Oh, JKR, she knows her fans, yes she does. She dares us to > > ask her whether Sirius is really dead, and all the time she's > > laughing in her sleeve at us, because the question we *should* > > be asking is who killed him. Now Kelly: I agree, JKR knows us all very well and knows we will ponder the questions almost to ridiculum. ;) But I am confused about one thing. Didn't Sirius fall through the veil while fighting Bella? When you say should we be asking who killed him are you suggesting he died later, after falling through the veil? As for me, I'm still not totally convinced he is gone for good. I think Harry (and the series) needs someone like Sirius, so we will see him (or hear from him) in some way in the future. From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Mon Nov 15 03:57:36 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2004 03:57:36 -0000 Subject: Sirius's Future In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117889 > Now Kelly: snip. Didn't Sirius fall through the veil while fighting Bella? > When you say should we be asking who killed him are you suggesting > he died later, after falling through the veil? As for me, I'm still > not totally convinced he is gone for good. Alla: No, Kelly, Pippin is a suggesting that Lupin fired the other curse. Pippin, please correct me if I am wrong :o) Kelly, welcome to SAD DENIAL. You are definitely not alone. :o) From annegirl11 at juno.com Mon Nov 15 04:00:50 2004 From: annegirl11 at juno.com (annegirl11 at juno.com) Date: Sun, 14 Nov 2004 23:00:50 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: racism, sexism and sexual orientation in OoP and the rest of the Potterverse Message-ID: <20041114.230058.432.11.annegirl11@juno.com> No: HPFGUIDX 117890 Alla said: > Oh, but you see there is such thing as "silent admission" and I > think that this could be the case. You know, she is not explicitly > denying it, so maybe she agreeing with it? :o) Oh, yes, certainly. And JKR has, in her twisty tactful way, debunked *some* ships, so there's precedent that she could. I just meant that "silent admission" (that's what I was calling equilibrium - we don't ask, she doesn't tell) is the best we can hope for. Which is good enough for me. Fanfic is often better than canon anyway. :) Aura ~*~ "What he didn't like about heroes was that they were usually suicidally gloomy when sober and homicidally insane when drunk." - Discword http://archive.skyehawke.com/authors.php?no=606 From jlnbtr at yahoo.com Mon Nov 15 02:39:56 2004 From: jlnbtr at yahoo.com (Juli) Date: Sun, 14 Nov 2004 18:39:56 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Sirius's Future/death In-Reply-To: <004c01c4ca94$df34b340$6901a8c0@Cassidy> Message-ID: <20041115023956.92935.qmail@web53103.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 117891 Charme: > I agree with Pippin that the main question is who *did* kill Sirius; it's rather vague in canon and flows with his duel with Bella, however it certainly isn't clear at all. It does make me wonder about "friendly fire" - we all know it happens in a real battle so why wouldn't it happen in a multiple wizard duel? I also note that while there's much written in the DoM scene with other participants in the battle, there isn't as much about Lupin until *after* Sirius is hit. I should wonder what that lack of detail should tell us? Are you suggesting Lupin may have killed Sirius? I just can't believe that, they were best friends, and they still cared for each other (I'm thinking of the Shrinking shack, Remus is in no way like Pettigrew, he didn't become friends with the marauders to get their protection, he just wanted friends. And we see it even in OoP, like when Harry tells them Snape has stopped teaching him Oclumency, Sirius wanted to give Snape a piece of his mind, but Remus stopped him, why? because he knew that if Sirius went to Hogwarts the MoM or the DEs would get him, and he just couldn't handle it. I don't believe in ESE!Lupin, he's just a nice guy with bad luck. I think Sirius died because he crossed the veil, Bella didn't AK him, it was a a red ray, not a green, so he could have been alive when he crossed over, so maybe HUGE MAYBE, he could come back, and as much as I would like it, I don't see it happening. Juli From coriolan at worldnet.att.net Mon Nov 15 04:34:41 2004 From: coriolan at worldnet.att.net (coriolan_cmc) Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2004 04:34:41 -0000 Subject: FILK: Our Crime Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117892 Our Crime To the tune of Our Time, from Sondheim's Merrily We Roll Along http://www.hamienet.com/cat387.html Dedicated to Pippin THE SCENE: Just outside Godric's Hollow, on the evening of October 31, 1980. Their voices pulsating with youthful idealism, Death Eaters LUCIUS MALFOY, BELLATRIX LESTRANGE & PETER PETTIGREW eagerly anticipate Voldemort's planned massacre of the Potter family. LUCIUS Someone who's shifty Underground Won't be undone It'll be nifty When he's found Lily and James's son It's all clear It's so horrible We're so horrible See us here We're so evil `cause we're Death Eaters We're Lucius, Bellatrix and Peter Let them know now to fear us It's our crime, mortal sin Time to kill and kill again His wrath they will rue You-Know-Who, man, You-Know-Who! PETER: He knows the secret That I kept .. BELLATRIX: What? PETER: Where they dwell! Shouldn't we three bet He'll have schlepped The Potter clan to Hell? And you and me, We're betraying them without qualm With dark magic and icy calm All three shall be laid low ALL THREE Over there in the Hollow Our crime, mortal sin Time to kill and kill again His wrath they shall rue You-Know-Who, pal, You-Know-Who! BELLATRIX Soon they're dead It's so wonderful He's so wonderful! ALL THREE At Hog's Head All we heard was that odd prediction, Of some child who'd bring us friction Now it looks like he can't! LUCIUS His chances seem scant. ALL THREE: It's their heads on the block. >From our acts and aftershocks Our crime they will rue You-Know-Who, pal, You-Know-Who! You-Know-Who! The Dark Mark appears in the sky above the Potters' cottage LUCIUS (spoken) There! PETER (spoken): There it is! BELLATRIX (spoken): Say it for me LUCIUS (spoken): You call it the Dark Mark, you call it Morsmordre ? we're standing on the threshold of the future ? we've got to be the luckiest villains who ever lived - after this moment ? this moment that the three of us are sharing here together ? nothing is ever going to be the way it was ? ever again. Do you guys realize that from now on we're going to be able to kill everyone ? everyone who's ever dared to oppose us? What a time to be starting out! What a time to take a life! PETER (music) Someone who's shifty Underground Won't be undone It'll be nifty When he's found Lily and James's son BELLATRIX It's all clear It's so horrible PETER & LUCIUS We're so horrible ALL THREE Now we're here We're so evil `cause we're Death Eaters We're Lucius, Bellatrix and Peter Let them know now to fear us It's our crime, mortal sin Time to kill and kill again His wrath they will rue You-Know-Who, man, You-Know-Who! Very soon We'll slay Prewett, and Frank attack Torture Alice and set up Black They then will send that man Straight to Azkaban It's their heads on the block. >From our acts and aftershocks Our crimes are due to You-Know-Who, pal, You-Know-Who! You-Know-Who! You-Know-Who! You-Know-Who! You-Know-Who! You-Know-Who! You-Know-Who! You-Know-Who! - CMC HARRY POTTER FILKS http://home.att.net/~coriolan/hpfilks.htm (updated today with 52 new filks, 4 new illustrations) From bob.oliver at cox.net Mon Nov 15 04:06:18 2004 From: bob.oliver at cox.net (lupinlore) Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2004 04:06:18 -0000 Subject: HP: Mystery or Adventure? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117893 The words "mystery" and "adventure" are often used to characterize the HP saga. However, these two kinds of stories have quite different characteristics. I wonder if much of the argument over HP in fan circles has to do with whether one approaches it more as a mystery or more as an adventure? In a "mystery" one expects the author to operate more or less within a rather strict set of rules. Most of these rules really arise from one basic premise: the ultimate meanings of plot and character can't be presented without elaborate clues and foreshadowing. In the most archetypal cases, no "solutions" should be presented that the reader could not have "deduced" for him- or herself, given the clues provided. M. Night Shymalan's "The Sixth Sense" is a very good example of a mystery constructed according to the strictest of rules. Even if you don't deduce the ultimate "pay-off," after it is revealed you have to admit it was all there, laid out in front of you if you had only put everything together the correct way. In and "adventure," however, the rules are a lot less stringent. The "pay-off" in an adventure story arises from a hero or group of heroes surmounting a set of obstacles toward some goal. There really isn't any requirement that everything be deducible in advance, or even that everything be foreshadowed. True, it is considered dirty pool if the author does something too outrageous, such as having a critical character we've never heard of before drop in during the last ten pages of the book, but by and large one should expect the unexpected and cut the author a great deal of slack for throwing curve balls. Now, all sorts of middle ground exists between these two types of stories. I'm just suggesting things change depending on whether you regard HP as *more* mystery or *more* adventure. A lot of the developments in the HP saga look very different depending on whether one approaches the books as mysteries or as adventures. To choose an example Kneasy often talks about, the various seeming contradictions and puzzles surrounding Lupin might be significant indeed in a mystery. However, in an adventure story they would likely signify nothing much except that the author doesn't think those issues are important for advancing the plot. Dumbledore's behavior at various points might be extremely portentious if one thinks we are dealing mostly with a mystery. However, if the point is largely adventure his behavior is simply what is necessary to set up the challenge Harry and his friends have to overcome. Snape and the riddles surrounding him might be an intricate part of an overall mystery plot, or they might simply represent one challenge Harry must overcome in his adventures. People who approached HP as a mystery were deeply disappointed with the "obvious" nature of the prophecy. People who see it mostly as an adventure might simply accept the prophecy as a Maguffin needed to propel the plot of OOTP along. The development of "ancillary" characters such as Ron might be highly important for the pay off of a mystery, but in an adventure might just represent various curve balls thrown along the adventure road. For those people who favor mystery the MWPP generation is a possible source of clues. For those who see things in terms of adventure MWPP is just interesting backstory for the action. If HP is more mystery it is about unlocking deep secrets having to do with Harry and the nature of his relationship with others, including his enemies. If HP is more adventure then it is a story about reaching the goal of defeating an evil wizard. Personally, I think HP moves between mystery and adventure. However, it is likely that there are times when we think JKR is writing adventure that she is engaged in crafting a mystery, and also many times when we are sure we are dealing with a mystery of great import when in fact JKR is giving us an adventure story. Thus arise a good many of our confusions and disappointments. And thus arise a good many of our criticisms of JKR, that is we often feel she has played dirty with mysteries when she was writing adventure, and we often expect because she was doing one thing in a particular circumstance she will do it in another (i.e. if x is important why isn't y?). Just some thoughts. Lupinlore. From bob.oliver at cox.net Mon Nov 15 04:32:30 2004 From: bob.oliver at cox.net (lupinlore) Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2004 04:32:30 -0000 Subject: Head of House missions(was Re: Why did the founders retain Slytherin's house?) In-Reply-To: <20041114.223746.432.6.annegirl11@juno.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117894 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, annegirl11 at j... wrote: > BTW, ITA that sorting kids into Slytherine is to keep an eye on them. > It's not giving up on them at all, it's taking the kids with the highest > risk factors and keeping an eye on them. Unfortunatly, I'm not convinced > the current head of house is doing his job in keeping an eye on the > potential problem kids. Or, perhaps one could say that although this would normally be the job of the Head of Slytherin, Severus has another job that, unfortunately, takes precedence. Perhaps the Heads of each house have particular duties traditionaly associated with their House. So the Head of Slytherin is supposed to watch out for racists and dark wizards while the Head of Ravenclaw looks out for future scholars and the Head of Hufflepuff identifies future teachers, healers, and diplomats. In this scheme, the Head of Gryffindor keeps an eye out for heroes. Now, part of the interesting question here is that we have seen very few other examples of the Head of House other than the present heads and the archetypal portraits we have of the founders. There are two possible exceptions, however. One is Phineus Nigellus. It is a reasonable assumption that before being "Hogwarts' least popular Headmaster" he was Head of Slytherin. It is interesting that, unlike the case with Salazar and Snape, we have no indication that Nigellus was ever tainted with being a Dark Wizard (except perhaps by association with the Black family). Also it is of interest that in his interactions with Harry and Dumbledore he comes across as snotty and sarcastic, but never evinces the bitter pettiness, or the extreme unfairness, that characterizes Severus. Thus, it is possible that Phineus is a more typical example of a Head of Slytherin than is Snape. If that is so, and it is of course a pure guess, then a more typical Head of Slytherin would be an unpleasant and unpopular person, a person who has few illusions about the nature of humanity or of teenagers, but nevertheless a person without a lot of Snape's least attractive attributes as a teacher, and without known connections with Dark Wizards. Such a person would perhaps be well suited to recognizing the signs of an incipient Dark Wizard and moving to nip the situation in the bud. It makes one wonder who was Head of Slytherin during Riddle's years at Hogwarts, or Severus' for that matter. In the case of Gryffindor it is reasonable to suspect that Dumbledore was Head of House before becoming Headmaster. If so it is likely that the typical Head of Gryffindor possesses the traits that he and McGonagall share, that is basic fairness and a devotion to their students combined with a hardheaded insistance that people must learn from "real-life" experience and from suffering the consequences of their mistakes. Any other thoughts? Lupinlore From jlnbtr at yahoo.com Mon Nov 15 03:49:46 2004 From: jlnbtr at yahoo.com (Juli) Date: Sun, 14 Nov 2004 19:49:46 -0800 (PST) Subject: CHAPTER DISCUSSION: Chapter 31, O.W.L.s In-Reply-To: <54.3753034f.2ec93b2d@aol.com> Message-ID: <20041115034946.39342.qmail@web53102.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 117895 OWLS The chapter begins with Ron extremely happy about winning the Quidditch cup and how he's forced back into reality when Harry and Hermione tell him about Grawp and their promise of teaching him how to speak. As the OWLS approached everyone got more and more nervous. Draco told Crabbe and Goyle that it didn't matter how much you studied but who you know, and his father just happened to be friends with Griselda Marchbanks, the magical exams chief. But Neville mentions he doesn't believe it. Professor Marchbanks is a friend of his grandmother's and he's never heard her talk about the Malfoys. During Transfiguration, MM says they'd better not cheat in any way, and that they'll receive an owl with their results in July. The night before their first exam, they saw the examiners arrive and overheard Professor Marchbanks say that if DD doesn't want to be found the MoM will not find him. On Monday morning they had the written Charms exam in the Great Hall, which looked just like it did when Harry's father took the OWLS. After lunch they took the Charms practical exam, and were called in alphabetically. Harry got Professor Tofty who acted very kind. Malfoy who was next to him didn't do so well, for he seemed to care more about Harry's test than his own. Next the 5th years took their written Transfiguration test, after which Harry felt he could have done better but thought his practical could have been worse. Then he did Herbology reasonably well. In DADA, he had no problem answering the written questions, and enjoyed doing his best in front of DU during the practical. Professor Tofty even asked him if he wanted to do a Patronus to improve his grade which he did. On Friday Hermione had Ancient Runes, while Ron and Harry were free. Then Hermione comes in telling them that another niffler has shown up in DU's office and she'll probably blame Hagrid for it even if he was teaching a class at the time. During the weekend they studied for their remaining exams. On Monday, Harry found the written exam for Potions difficult but the practical less dreadful than he expected mainly due to the fact that Snape was absent. On Tuesday, they had Care of Magical Creatures, in which Harry tried to do his best so Hagrid would look good. As he was leaving, Harry gave Hagrid who was watching from his window a thumbs-up. On Wednesday they had the theory exam for Astronomy in the morning. In the afternoon Harry and Ron had Divination, and of course they failed it since neither one could see anything. That night they had the Astronomy practical, during which Harry saw 5 or 6 people leaving the castle, one of whom being DU. They went over to Hagrid's house and tried to arrest him, but their Stunning Spells didn't do anything to him. Then MM came running out of the castle, yelling "How dare you?" and then at least 4 stunning rays hit her and she fell on the ground. Hagrid then escaped. Harry's last exam was History of Magic. As Harry tried to answer the questions, he fell asleep and into his dream of the Department of Mysteries again. Harry heard a cold voice issuing from his own mouth saying "Take it for me now" and saw his own arm point the wand at a dark figure on the floor as he heard "Crucio!" Sirius screamed with the pain and then whispered "You'll have to kill me." As LV lowered his wand again, Harry heard his own scream, and he woke up as he hit the floor. Discussion questions 1. Why was Draco Malfoy next to Harry during their Charms exam? If they were called alphabetically, Draco must have been called long before Harry. 2. If DD is about 150 years old, then how old is Professor Marchbanks? She examined DD maybe over 130 years ago, and she should have been a grown wizard by then, right? 3. Will Harry get enough OWLS to continue his career as an Auror? 4. If Fred and George only got about 3 OWLS each, what classes did they have during their 6th and 7th year? Only 3 classes? 5. How could the Trio teach Grawp how to speak if he's so violent they can't even get close to him? 6. Why didn't the examiners do anything to stop whoever was with DU from hurting MM? 7. Do practical and written exams each count as an OWLS? 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 From jlnbtr at yahoo.com Mon Nov 15 02:57:48 2004 From: jlnbtr at yahoo.com (Juli) Date: Sun, 14 Nov 2004 18:57:48 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Trelawney - real seer or not? (was Re: DU treatment of Trelawney) In-Reply-To: <006301c4ca97$b17a6f00$6901a8c0@Cassidy> Message-ID: <20041115025748.13422.qmail@web53102.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 117896 --- charme wrote: > > Charme: > Funny, but perhaps foreshadowing by JKR. If the > theorists who proclaim that a part of TR is in > Harry as a result of LV trying to kill him at GH, > they could have more support should we discover > that TR was born in the middle of winter. :) I believe there's some of LV in Harry, but why would it change his birthday? I mean, he was born on July, and LV tried to kill him over a year later in October, so if anything I would say he could have been "born" on October (the middle of autumn), maybe this was some sort of re-born, since that night changed his entire life. Let's say LV was born on January, when he tranferred some of his powers to Harry (like parseltongue), how could he transfer his birth, this would make Harry 70+. Juli From finwitch at yahoo.com Mon Nov 15 08:28:58 2004 From: finwitch at yahoo.com (finwitch) Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2004 08:28:58 -0000 Subject: Trelawney - real seer or not? (was Re: DU treatment of Trelawney) In-Reply-To: <20041114200705.56443.qmail@web53105.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117897 Juli: > > > I think Trelawney just plays with the odds, we know > Neville always breaks thing, so why wouldn't he break > it? Besides, if someone tells you "careful with that" > you'll propably break it. Finwitch: But how would Trelawney know that, being that she hardly ever leaves her tower? And anyway, method doesn't count in predicting the future, results do. Juli: > I can't help myself, but I remeber when she tells > Harry he must have been born in the middle of the > winter, that's just so funny. Finwitch: Well... she's for the future, not the past. and midwinter does not need to refer to 21.12. or January or February. It could possibly mean at the height of the Dark rule or even nt. (what ever that would mean, new time?). Juli: > Sure seers have always been chased, but so have > witches, I think it's for the same reason, people are > afraid of what they don't know. I don't think a seer > in the WW is thought as a problem, they are seers just > like others are metamorphus. Finwitch: That -don't know/understand-> afraid -> hostile is indeed sadly usual. And WW can't come right out and say 'Seers are bad' - because um - they'd be saying that of truth. They can, however, deny them credibility so they can go on with their happy illusions... Anyway, Seeing isn't something that can be easily explained. Not because well... you need to be able to deal with predestination, reality of time, mortality, the fact that compared to the Universe, you're not really much... Finwitch From greatraven at hotmail.com Mon Nov 15 08:42:33 2004 From: greatraven at hotmail.com (sbursztynski) Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2004 08:42:33 -0000 Subject: Why did the founders retain Slytherin's house? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117898 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "delwynmarch" wrote: > > Olivier wrote : > " Only me, but I read it as a subtle sex-joke, one of course that > could not be explained more clearly. While the other girls fantasize > about Firenze, Hermione shows cleverly that she knows why it is rather > pointless to have fantasies about him." > > Pippin commented : > " Erm...if a blast ended skrewt is a cross between a manticore and a > fire crab and Hagrid is the offspring of a giantess and a human male..." > > Del replies : > LOL ! > The image of Parvati or Lavender being actually confronted to the > practicalities of having a love affair with a Centaur makes me laugh. > > Though... > > Male horses are considered the epitome of masculinity by some people. > And the idea of riding away in the sunset on the back of your Centaur > lover is romantic enough, don't you think ? > > " Pippin > who had a thing for Mr. Spock at that age" > > Heh, heh. I did too. > By the way, Mr Spock is a half-breed too... > > Del And Sue: Chuckle! Yes, the practicalities ... I always did wonder how Hagrid could even have ASKED Olympe which parent was the giant. I mean, really! Of course, there was that passage in the Morte D'Arthure about a rapist giant who'd kidnapped a young woman and also raped her old duenna and if Malory could consider this sort of thing possible, why not Hagrid? As for the Centaurs, don't forget Firenze has already been in trouble with his people for carrying a human (Harry) on his back, in PS - they don't like it. I suspect Parvati and Lavender are just teenage girls drooling over a pretty male without taking the matter to its logical conclusion. Me three, Spock fan! Although, again with practicalities, you really would NOT want to be around during pon farr... From spotthedungbeetle at hotmail.com Mon Nov 15 09:14:33 2004 From: spotthedungbeetle at hotmail.com (dungrollin) Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2004 09:14:33 -0000 Subject: Pounds to Galleons (Was: Why did the founders...) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117899 Del wrote: "... we don't know what the rate of Pounds-to-Galleons is, it could be very advantageous ..." Dungrollin: Actually we do. In the intro of FBAWTFT it says that comic relief has raised 174 million pounds which is 34,000,872 galleons, 14 sickles and 7 knuts. Unless my maths has deteriorated more than I thought, (which is entirely possible, and please correct me if I'm wrong - though I'll be far too embarrassed to actually read the messages) that makes an approximate exchange rate of: 1 Galleon = ?5.12 1 sickle = 30.1p 1 knut = 1.04p Someone else can convert it into fluid ounces, though... Dungrollin. A closed mouth gathers no feet. From bboyminn at yahoo.com Mon Nov 15 10:07:22 2004 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2004 10:07:22 -0000 Subject: Why did the founders retain Slytherin's house? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117900 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "lupinlore" wrote: > > > Lets delve a little into that ever-popular topic, Slytherin House. > We know that Salazar departed in a huff when the other founders > didn't agree with his pureblood policies. Why then, did the other > founders allow his House to remain part of Hogwarts. ... > > ...edited... > > Lupinlore bboyminn: Why did the school retain Slytherin's identity after he left? Simple, he bought and paid for it. First, let's look at the building itself. This is the largest and most massive pre-modern/medieval building ever constructed. Eight floor main wings (ground plus 7 floors) which based on architecture of the day would have had very high ceilings. That makes it close to, conservatively, the height of a 12 to 14 story modern office or apartment building. And that's just the main wings, we add to that four towering towers, one of which we can assume is 14 to 16 floors, again with high ceilings, making them closer to the height of a +20 story modern office building. In addition, we appear to have a few to several minor towers, an enclosed courtyard, substantial grounds, and extensive furnishings. Currently, Windsor Castle is the largest working castle in the world. 'Working castle' means it still a family residence rather than a museum. Windsor would look like a country cottage along side Hogwarts. OK, I understand that Hogwarts in fictional and Windsor is real, but in the Potterverse, they are both real. Point: even with magic, a castle of that massive substance was not cheap to create. Private schools of this nature are almost always created on benevolent grants and endowments by the founders. That means that one forth of the school belongs to Slytherin by virtue of the fact that he paid for it. His house/sub-school continues to exist, because he donated grants and endowments which would allow it to exist in perpetuity (assuming the endowments aren't mismanaged). To kill Slytherin House would be like stealing that money. In addition, and regardless of what the books would lead us to believe, being ambitious and cunning are not crimes. You are not evil by virtue of the desire to be successful. But among successful and ambitious people, there are those, those but not all, who will 'use any means to achieve their ends'. And that is not a tendency that is limited to Slytherin. True, many extremely ambitious people, in the fictional world and the real world, make morally, ethically, and legally unsound choices, but that's human nature, and not something reserved exclusively for Slytherins. And, is not a require trait to be successfull. So, why does does the school continue with Slytherin House, because Slytherin created and paid for Hogwarts to teach his unique type of magical students. To not continue with it, or to remove Slytherin's history from the school would not only be a form of stealing money, but it would be a form of stealing history. I'm alway very wary of people who want to rewrite history to their own convinience. Remember, we learn from each other by being different, not by all being the same. Just a few thoughts. Steve/bboyminn (sorry for misspellings, I'm not on my own home computer; no on-line dictionary) From jiggsvelasco at yahoo.com Mon Nov 15 09:27:13 2004 From: jiggsvelasco at yahoo.com (jp velasco) Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2004 01:27:13 -0800 (PST) Subject: CHAPTER DISCUSSION: Chapter 31, O.W.L.s In-Reply-To: <20041115034946.39342.qmail@web53102.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041115092713.39213.qmail@web52906.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 117901 JP here! Discussion questions 1. Why was Draco Malfoy next to Harry during their Charms exam? If they were called alphabetically, Draco must have been called long before Harry. Maybe Malfoy was having a hard time doing his practical exam. I think that each student has a different practical test time limit, depending on who was testing the student. So if the tester believes that your are capable enough to pass the exam, then you won't have to stay there showing every charm in the book... just like our exams when I was in college. On the other hand, if the tester is not quite convinced,(and I believe that Malfoy's tester isn't) then he will ask question after question until that tester is satisfied. 2. If DD is about 150 years old, then how old is Professor Marchbanks? She examined DD maybe over 130 years ago, and she should have been a grown wizard by then, right? Prof. Marchbanks (PM), I believe is aged between 180 to 200 years old(!!!). When you think about it, DD is tested when he was seventeen or eighteen, so PM could be like 30 to 50 years old during this time. But time is different in the WW, maybe that's the reason why there's are room in the Department of Mysteries studying this. And there are many discussions and posts about time, ages, and what can really kill a wizard so it doesn't really surprise me that there are very ancient wizards running around the WW. But here's another thought: What if PM has a Sorcerer's stone? That may explain his Life span, doesn't it? Another thought: if PM is the Examiner since DD's time, then it follows that he also tested Tom Jr. I wonder what's his opinion about Tom Jr.'s abilities... 3. Will Harry get enough OWLS to continue his career as an Auror? Yeah... I think that Harry could get enough OWLS to be an Auror. I think that the absence of Prof. Snape during his exam in potions is an indicator that he can get an OWL in that subject. Although that reasoning is very thin... I believe in his (Harry's) capabilities as a potion-maker. It's just that he is not concentrating enough whenever he's making a potion in front of Prof. Snape. I believe that he did well in his written exam (see my answer on discussion no. 7) so I think he will pass it. 4. If Fred and George only got about 3 OWLS each, what classes did they have during their 6th and 7th year? Only 3 classes? Well... the books did not actually said that only the subjects that you have passed in your OWLS are the only subject that you can take in your 6th and 7th year (or am I wrong?). It did indicate though that you can now have the option to drop subjects so that you can concentrate your time on your major subjects. Reading between the lines though, I would think that Fred and George did only take 3 subjects because they will need more time to research the consumers for their jokeshop, not to mention time to make their products, now that they could do it freely and away from Molly's eyes. The 3 subjects that I believe that Fred and George had taken are Charms, Transfiguration, and (even though they hate it...) Potions. I came to this conclusion beacuse these subjects are what FW and GW need in order to make products for their jokeshop. 5. How could the Trio teach Grawp how to speak if he's so violent they can't even get close to him? There are posts and discussions about Grawp's "violent" behavior and I remember one post saying that Grawp doesn't mean to be violent... as Hagrid said he's just too big and strong and he doesn't know it. But I think the ice was broken when Grawp saved Harry and Hermione from the Centaurs. Grawp tried to talk to "Hermy", asking her where is "Hagger". I think that in teaching Grawp, Hermione is the key factor for his learning. I imagine Hermione, on top of a hill with Harry (or Ron) and teaching Grawp vocabulary, grammar and pronounciation. And in this instance, Grawp would probably remember Hermione and not be violent. And besides... Hagrid will be there now that he is not persued by the MoM and probably teach Grawp instead. 6. Why didn't the examiners do anything to stop whoever was with DU from hurting MM? First of all, they were all at the top of the tower. Second, the examiners (most of them anyway) were so old and ancient that they would probably die of a heart attack or a seisure while running down to help MM. (HaHaHa!). Third even if, after they have ran down to Hagrid's hut to help, DU is the Headmistress and has more authority than the examiners while they were in Hogwarts. We can see that the examiners were concerned with what's happening on the grounds. Their reactions were indicators of how they feel about it. In the end, the examiners can not do anything about the incident because of the reasons I have stated above. (hope it's plausible) 7. Do practical and written exams each count as an OWLS? No, I dont believe that the written and practical exams each count as an OWL. I think that the exams has a certain percentage to the total amount of points needed to achieve an A, EE or an O grade. I think that the percentage is 50 - 50 : 50% for written exam and 50% for practical exam. The points acquired in both exams are then averaged and the result will determine the OWL grade. That is why I think that Harry will get his Auror subject next school year. (see question no. 3) Thanks for reading my answers and I hope all (or some) of my answers will enlighten everyone who reads it. PEACE! From jiggsvelasco at yahoo.com Mon Nov 15 10:07:25 2004 From: jiggsvelasco at yahoo.com (jp velasco) Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2004 02:07:25 -0800 (PST) Subject: Sirius's Future In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041115100725.67873.qmail@web52905.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 117902 JP here: I also don't believe that Sirius is dead. First, the spell that hit Sirius is not the usual green of the AK, and the Canon never said what spell it was. Second, before the fighting, Harry and the gang saw the veil moving, so it must mean that many souls are passing by this veil. (Take note: Souls.) Sirius went through the veil flesh and bone... and I think that it just transported Sirius somewhere else. (Just like Dante's Inferno, Purgatorio, and Paradiso.) I think that there will be a Chapter in HBP that will end in Harry in trouble, then Sirius out of nowhere saves him. And the next Chapter will tell of Sirius' Journey Through the Veil (probably tell Harry that he met his James and Lily inside the Veil). Just a thought... Thanks! From willsonkmom at msn.com Mon Nov 15 12:40:27 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2004 12:40:27 -0000 Subject: CHAPTER DISCUSSION: Chapter 31, O.W.L.s In-Reply-To: <20041115034946.39342.qmail@web53102.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117903 --- oops. sorry did not catch author of discussion to attribute it. > 3. Will Harry get enough OWLS to continue his career as > an Auror? Potioncat: He will take the appropriate classes, I think. Unless of course JKR has something very different in mind for him. The interesting part will be whether he meets the criteria as explained by McGonagall, or whether there is a change in staff that changes the criteria. > > 4. If Fred and George only got about 3 OWLS each, what > classes did they have during their 6th and 7th year? > Only 3 classes? Potioncat: We know they took DADA (they talk about Umbridge's class) but they might not have needed an OWL to take it. That depends on the teacher I think. I would think they did fine in charms because several of their products are discussed as being charmed. I'd guess Herbology and possibly Potions (a high pass rate.) > > 6. Why didn't the examiners do anything to stop whoever > was with DU from hurting MM? Potioncat: I'd like to know that too. The only thought I have is that aurors are like policemen and who would interfere with policemen? You might protest to someone later. > > From willsonkmom at msn.com Mon Nov 15 12:45:32 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2004 12:45:32 -0000 Subject: CHAPTER DISCUSSION: Chapter 31, O.W.L.s In-Reply-To: <20041115092713.39213.qmail@web52906.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117904 >>Juli wrote: > > Discussion questions > > 1. Why was Draco Malfoy next to Harry during their Charms > exam? If they were called alphabetically, Draco must > have been called long before Harry. >>JP answered > > Maybe Malfoy was having a hard time doing his practical exam. I think that each student has a different practical test time limit, depending on who was testing the student. So if the tester believes that your are capable enough to pass the exam, then you won't have to stay there showing every charm in the book... just like our exams when I was in college. On the other hand, if the tester is not quite convinced,(and I believe that Malfoy's tester isn't) then he will ask question after question until that tester is satisfied. Potioncat: They took the students in small groups. It appears that as several examiners became free, they took a new batch. I don't think "M" Malfoy would be too far ahead of "P" Potter. And yes, as JP said, he could be taking longer than whoever else was in his group. Nott comes to mind. Besides, I don't think Draco is very charming. From willsonkmom at msn.com Mon Nov 15 12:50:33 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2004 12:50:33 -0000 Subject: Trelawney - real seer or not? (was Re: DU treatment of Trelawney) In-Reply-To: <20041115025748.13422.qmail@web53102.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117905 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Juli wrote: > > --- charme wrote: > > > > Charme: > > Funny, but perhaps foreshadowing by JKR. If the > > theorists who proclaim that a part of TR is in > > Harry as a result of LV trying to kill him at GH, > > they could have more support should we discover > > that TR was born in the middle of winter. :) > >>Juli > I believe there's some of LV in Harry, but why would > it change his birthday? I mean, he was born on July, > and LV tried to kill him over a year later in > October, so if anything I would say he could have been > "born" on October (the middle of autumn), maybe this > was some sort of re-born, since that night changed his > entire life. Let's say LV was born on January, when he > tranferred some of his powers to Harry (like > parseltongue), how could he transfer his birth, this > would make Harry 70+. > Potioncat: No it wouldn't change Harry's birthday, but if he has the qualities of a winter birthday because of Tom Riddle, Trelawney might interpret them as winter for Harry. On the other hand, I found very old post but I don't remember who wrote it, and it was suggested that if Trelawney is Australian, a July birthday would be in winter. Potioncat dodging jars of vegemite, but hoping to catch one. From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Mon Nov 15 13:00:05 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2004 13:00:05 -0000 Subject: Why did the founders retain Slytherin's house? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117906 Alla wrote : "Are you saying that muggleborns would prefer not to come to Hogwarts at all? That they would be happier if they won't discover their abilities?" Del replies : Not all of them, but some of them. Why would they all want to switch to the WW ? Is the WW so *objectively* better than the Muggle World ? Or are they just made to *believe* that ? I can understand that the more talented Muggleborns would be happy to finally discover why weird stuff keeps happening to them, and to have an opportunity to actually make a life out of their special talent. But I can imagine that many Muggleborns would also consider their magical ability as only one part of their personality, and wouldn't see the necessity to mold their entire life around that one trait. Except that at Hogwarts they are taught that being magical makes them superior to Muggles. "Being a wizard is superior to being Muggle" : don't you see how this can *easily* lead to "being wizard-born is superior to being Muggle-born" ? The pureblood ideology is only a CONSEQUENCE of the full-blown racism against non-magical and non-human people that pollutes the entire WW. Del From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Mon Nov 15 13:14:01 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2004 13:14:01 -0000 Subject: Pounds to Galleons (Was: Why did the founders...) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117907 I, Del, wrote earlier : "... we don't know what the rate of Pounds-to-Galleons is, it could be very advantageous ..." Dungrollin answered : " Actually we do. In the intro of FBAWTFT it says that comic relief has raised 174 million pounds which is 34,000,872 galleons, 14 sickles and 7 knuts." Del replies : Ooooh, thank you ! I completely forgot about that one ! Dungrolling wrote : " that makes an approximate exchange rate of: 1 Galleon = ?5.12 1 sickle = 30.1p 1 knut = 1.04p " Del replies : I won't check your maths :-) Now all your British folks : what do you think of that exchange rate ? Does it feel right to you ? We don't know the price of many things, so it's hard to say, which is why I'm just asking for a general feeling. Of course, if that exchange rate is not really advantageous to Muggles, I could always argue that it's because JKR is bad at maths, LOL !! Del From mysticowl at gmail.com Mon Nov 15 13:23:23 2004 From: mysticowl at gmail.com (Alina) Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2004 08:23:23 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Pounds to Galleons (Was: Why did the founders...) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117908 I'm not British, but the exchange rate doesn't seem unfair to me. Considering that one Galleon is a lot more money than one pound. Remember, the Weasleys had what, practically none, in their vault? 500 is enough for a trip for two adults and 5 kids to Egypt and a new wand? Crudely, that's 2500 pounds. Sounds about right to me. Alina. From claphamsubwarden at yahoo.com Mon Nov 15 13:27:56 2004 From: claphamsubwarden at yahoo.com (Chris) Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2004 13:27:56 -0000 Subject: Sirius's Future In-Reply-To: <20041115100725.67873.qmail@web52905.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117909 JP wrote: "that many souls are passing by this veil. (Take note: Souls.) Sirius went through the veil flesh and bone... and I think that it just transported Sirius somewhere else. (Just like Dante's Inferno, Purgatorio, and Paradiso.) I think that there will be a Chapter in HBP that will end in Harry in trouble, then Sirius out of nowhere saves him. And the next Chapter will tell of Sirius' Journey Through the Veil (probably tell Harry that he met his James and Lily inside the Veil). " Chris now: Firstly the book says a coloured beam, so could be the red of Lestrange or another colour from someone else, though I think the former is more likely. Carrying on from the snip, I think that this is a great thought and it is something that I would definitely like to see happen. Next, my own thoughts on the matter are that Sirius is not dead, but I am not sure that Sirius will return as flesh and blood, though I wish that he will. Finally, what if at the end of the Septilogy, Sirius going through the veil provides a conduit for Harry to talk one last time to his parents before either carrying with his life, or stepping through to join them, (a la Frodo going to the Grey Havens). Chris From willsonkmom at msn.com Mon Nov 15 15:05:50 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2004 15:05:50 -0000 Subject: Why did the founders retain Slytherin's house? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117910 > bboyminn: >snip > In addition, and regardless of what the books would lead us to > believe, being ambitious and cunning are not crimes. You are not evil > by virtue of the desire to be successful. But among successful and > ambitious people, there are those, those but not all, who will 'use > any means to achieve their ends'. And that is not a tendency that is > limited to Slytherin. > > True, many extremely ambitious people, in the fictional world and the > real world, make morally, ethically, and legally unsound choices, but > that's human nature, and not something reserved exclusively for > Slytherins. And, is not a require trait to be successfull. Potioncat: I agree with Steve. Although I'm not sure if JKR agrees with us. Within a group of ambitious individuals some will be so driven by ambition that they will choose less than honorable means. Slytherin House isn't the house for Dark Wizards, but becoming Dark Wizards is one of the tempations facing that house. Based on the qualities given for Slytherin, we should see some highly competitive, successful individuals. We don't. But if you look at house points, they must be doing well somewhere. Someone is giving them points. We started out like Harry, hearing some rumors about Slytherin House.We don't see any of the gossip about Gryffindors, although we do see some about Hufflepuff. (Duffers) And we do get a little look at how other students sometimes see Harry. Quite a few of them are afraid of him at times, so Gryffindor isn't seen as a Purely Good house. So I'm not so sure the adults at Hogwarts view Slytherin House as a house of bad kids. Although it does seem to me that the rowdy, hard to handle kids might tend to come from Gryffindor and Slytherin. From boyd.t.smythe at fritolay.com Mon Nov 15 15:21:28 2004 From: boyd.t.smythe at fritolay.com (Smythe, Boyd T {FLNA}) Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2004 09:21:28 -0600 Subject: Did DD lie about the Prophecy? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117911 Del wrote: > We don't know anything about how the Seer gift works. Because of that, we don't know what kinds of conditions it works under, if any. How practical ! But let's assume that it doesn't just work at random, and that some kinds of conditions must be met. In that case, the major differences between the circumstances in which the two prophecies were given strike me as suspicious. < boyd: Nice analysis of a great topic, Del, but I think you miss one other possibility. Warning--I'm about to spout some MD-ish subversion. But first a few observations. 1) We don't ever see or hear the prophecy firsthand. 2) We don't where prophecies come from. 3) We don't know by what process they are recorded into the MoM warehouse. 4) Dumbledore is not around when Harry hears Sybill's prophecy about the servant returning to its master. That leaves plenty of room for a most subversive reading of these prophecies: they're all a big fake-out. And a manipulative Dumbledore is the perpetrator, deftly using his partial knowledge of the future to nudge things in the right direction--with the 'prophecies.' I'm suggesting that he 'talks' through Sybill--a known seer-wannabe--to create bogus prophecies that meet his needs. So the other possibility is that these are not actual prophecies. But, you say, what about Jo's declaration that DD never lies to Harry? Believe it if you want, but consider this: Jo has misled us all many times before, both in-book and out. Remember the flim-flammery of the wand order? This is a mystery, and red herrings are part of the author's style. Perhaps she has merely extended her scope to include subterfuge within interviews, as well. Seeing the quantity of discussion out here, maybe she simply decided to throw a wrench in the works to keep us off the scent. She'd likely enjoy it! Apologies if I've ruffled any feathers, but let's continue to question everything in this HP-universe. Especially Dumbledore. --boyd rainy days and mondays always get me subversive From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Mon Nov 15 15:37:01 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2004 15:37:01 -0000 Subject: Did DD lie about the Prophecy? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117912 boyd wrote : "Nice analysis of a great topic, Del, but I think you miss one other possibility." Del replies : I'd be surprised if I missed only one :-D ! Boyd wrote : " But first a few observations. 1) We don't ever see or hear the prophecy firsthand." Del replies : Not first-hand, agreed. We do see a recording of it in the Pensieve, but that leaves way enough room for subversive reading, I agree. Boyd wrote : "That leaves plenty of room for a most subversive reading of these prophecies: they're all a big fake-out. And a manipulative Dumbledore is the perpetrator, deftly using his partial knowledge of the future to nudge things in the right direction--with the 'prophecies.' I'm suggesting that he 'talks' through Sybill--a known seer-wannabe--to create bogus prophecies that meet his needs." Del replies : Interesting ! But my first question is : what was DD's need to tell Harry about LV's servant breaking free ? As we discussed previously, the knowledge of that prophecy didn't change anything in the way events happened that night. So what was the point ? Unless, of course, you become really subversive and say that the only point of the servant-prophecy was to set a precedent, so that Harry would not even think of doubting the vanquisher-prophecy when he would hear it... As for what JKR says in interviews, I agree that we should be careful about it. She obviously enjoys leading us completely astray in her books, so why shouldn't she enjoy getting us completely astray during the whole time the series is being written ? HP is still a work-in-progress, after all. Boyd wrote : "rainy days and mondays always get me subversive" Del replies : Do those two conditions reinforce or annihilate each other ? In other words : do you get uber-subversive on rainy mondays :-) ? Del From annemehr at yahoo.com Mon Nov 15 15:53:35 2004 From: annemehr at yahoo.com (annemehr) Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2004 15:53:35 -0000 Subject: CHAPTER DISCUSSION: Chapter 31, O.W.L.s In-Reply-To: <20041115034946.39342.qmail@web53102.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117913 > 2. If DD is about 150 years old, then how old is Professor > Marchbanks? She examined DD maybe over 130 years ago, > and she should have been a grown wizard by then, right? Well, it's not so surprising that she'd be 180-200 years old. After all, Dumbledore, old as he is, is still quite vigorous and powerful; Professor Marchbanks has aged to the point that she'd getting tottery and frail. > 3. Will Harry get enough OWLS to continue his career as > an Auror? Actually, I think he will. I think he underestimates his grades generally, and I also think it's not necessary to get a *perfect* grade on an OWL to achieve Outstanding. I think this just leaves room for him to squeak into Snape's NEWT potions class (I hope so, too). > 4. If Fred and George only got about 3 OWLS each, what > classes did they have during their 6th and 7th year? > Only 3 classes? Let's see...Herbology, Charms, and DADA. Here's what the book says: in Ch. 12 they mention trying to sell extendable ears before Herbology. In Ch. 15 they say Umbridge had inspected their Charms class. And back in Ch. 9 they apparate into Ron and Harry's room wondering who'd set the Slinkhard book, and in Ch. 25 Lee Jordan gets detention from Umbridge because he points out to her that under the most recent Decree, she couldn't tell off F&G for playing Exploding Snap in the back of class, so they had DADA. That's all I could find. That's really not enough classes to fill a week, though; you suppose Hogwarts has some "vocational" type classes you don't need to have passed an OWL for, or do they just have a very light schedule? I'm not surprised they don't have Potions; they arent' likely to have got an O in their OWL, though they may well have passed, and I'm sure they could do their own research as they needed it. > 5. How could the Trio teach Grawp how to speak if he's > so violent they can't even get close to him? Well, they never actually had to, because Hagrid was still there until Wednesday on the second week of OWLs. I suppose what they would have done was to call to him from just out of his reach, since he had been tied up. After the MoM battle, Grawp was loose, and the Trio recovering from the battle, so I'm sure they stayed out of the Forest the rest of term. Annemehr From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com Mon Nov 15 16:20:53 2004 From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (arrowsmithbt) Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2004 16:20:53 -0000 Subject: Did DD lie about the Prophecy? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117914 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "delwynmarch" wrote: > > But my first question is : what was DD's need to tell Harry about LV's > servant breaking free ? As we discussed previously, the knowledge of > that prophecy didn't change anything in the way events happened that > night. So what was the point ? > It was a not-so subtle warning. Because the Prophecy wasn't about Peter, it was about Sirius. There's Harry, getting all gooey about leaving Privet Drive, ready to move in with a criminal on the run, the person who bears a large proportion of the blame for the deaths of his parents ( and that's if you're of a generous disposition - Sirius being stupidly brilliant with the SK swap - if you're more suspicious you may think a lot worse). And he's known this character for maybe half-an-hour. Wonderful. Just what DD needs - Harry removed from protection and under the influence of someone who has the cool, analytical planning ability of a wet cat and just happens to be the subject of a major manhunt. Harry might survive for two days - if he's lucky. Sirius has no wand and Harry is hardly the world's best wizard at this point. And if he uses his wand the Ministry will nail him. Nah, it's a disaster waiting to happen. If you're really subversive you can postulate that it's all a deliberate plot to get Harry out into the open. That second prophecy is intended to make Harry think, but that's a forlorn hope where Harry's concerned. Kneasy From spotthedungbeetle at hotmail.com Mon Nov 15 16:49:25 2004 From: spotthedungbeetle at hotmail.com (dungrollin) Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2004 16:49:25 -0000 Subject: Did DD lie about the Prophecy? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117915 Kneasy wrote: > It was a not-so subtle warning. Because the Prophecy wasn't about > Peter, it was about Sirius. Have I missed it, or has anyone come up with a way of making the '... chained these twelve years. Tonight, before midnight, the servant will break free ...' fit with Sirius, who escaped from Azkaban 10 months previously? Dungrollin Who'll take a lack of response to mean 'no'. From bob.oliver at cox.net Mon Nov 15 11:17:57 2004 From: bob.oliver at cox.net (lupinlore) Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2004 11:17:57 -0000 Subject: Why did the founders retain Slytherin's house? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117916 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Steve" wrote: > > > Private schools of this nature are almost always created on benevolent > grants and endowments by the founders. That means that one forth of > the school belongs to Slytherin by virtue of the fact that he paid for > it. His house/sub-school continues to exist, because he donated grants > and endowments which would allow it to exist in perpetuity (assuming > the endowments aren't mismanaged). To kill Slytherin House would be > like stealing that money. > I am assuming you are using "private school" in the American use of the term (i.e. Public School vs. Private School). Now, the problem is, given that use of the term, Hogwarts isn't a private school. It is clearly managed by the Ministry, to the point that the Ministry has the right to appoint faculty and determine curriculum. One assumes that means it is also largely supported by government funds. Indeed, given that it is the only school in Wizarding Britain, it would be hard to see how it couldn't be supported by "tax galleons." This is further evidenced by the fact that we have never heard anybody say anything about paying tuition at Hogwarts. One way to explain this is that the Founders may well have been the closest thing the British Wizarding World had to a government circa 1000 A.D. If they were indeed the four most powerful wizards of their time, that would have been logical. If that is the case, Hogwarts then becomes a massive public works project, and the House structures are a matter of governmental politics, not private endowment (although it would be anachronistic to draw a line between public and private projects in the medieval world in any case). The idea that the Founders may have been the government of their era is supported if you are one of those who suspects Godric Gryffindor will turn out to be the Half-Blood Prince. Lupinlore From moonmyyst13 at yahoo.com Mon Nov 15 17:03:36 2004 From: moonmyyst13 at yahoo.com (K G) Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2004 09:03:36 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: [HPFGUOver40] Chapter titles from Half-blood Prince In-Reply-To: <1e2.2efe96eb.2ec80d61@aol.com> Message-ID: <20041115170336.97628.qmail@web53510.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 117917 Schlobin at aol.com wrote: In a message dated 11/12/2004 1:03:55 PM Eastern Standard Time, ladypensieve at yahoo.com writes: OK - latest from JKRs website for those who are interested.... Chapter Two: Spinners End; Chapter Six: Draco's Detour; Chapter Fourteen: Felix Felicis Since Spinners End sounds like a place, and it has been said that this book will be Harry's shortest stay with the Dursleys, it may be that he's going there! Do we have anything that says where Hermione lives? or McGonnagal? What about the deleted scene that shows an explosion at sea (or am I just dreaming that one?) Is that maybe where the OoTP headquarters is at now that Sirius is gone? Or maybe it is where Lupin lives? Do we have cannon on any of those? I am at work right now and do not have my books nor time to search Lexicon. Does anyone have any clue about where each of these are? Also, I would tend to think that Draco's Detour has to do with visiting his dad at Azcaban... but unless Harry is there, it would be kind of hard to fit that in. Is there someone that Harry would visit there? Maybe go with the Weasleys to visit Percy after Fudge is run out of town? moonmyyst --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From bob.oliver at cox.net Mon Nov 15 11:28:51 2004 From: bob.oliver at cox.net (lupinlore) Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2004 11:28:51 -0000 Subject: Founders as Wizarding Government Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117918 In a recent post Steve (bboymin) brought up the issue of whether Hogwarts is a Private or Public School (American sense of those terms). This got me to thinking about the Founders and their role in their society. Hogwarts seems to me to be a Public School (American sense). The Ministry clearly has ultimate control over the place, to the point of appointing faculty and determining curriculum. In addition, we have never heard anyone talk about paying tuition at Hogwarts, and at seems unlikely that many families, for instance the Weasleys, would be able to do so. Given all this, it seems likely that Hogwarts is supported in whole or at least in the great majority by government funds. Now, how could this come about? Perhaps the Founders were the closest thing Wizarding Britain had to a government circa 1000 A.D. Given that they are described as the four greatest wizards of their age, that would make sense. Perhaps they functioned as a sort of combined executive, with Hogwarts being their primary governmental project. One interesting corollary to this would be to give further weight to the idea that the Half-Blood Prince is in fact Godric Gryffindor. It may be that the founders were considered the royalty of the Wizarding World of their era, and were referred to as Princes and Princesses (with no single one of them being a King or Queen). Pure speculation, of course, but it does make a kind of sense. This could also explain why the Sorting Hat is going to be important. We know it was Godric's hat, and many people have speculated that Godric's mind or memories, and perhaps those of the other Founders, still reside in it. Maybe part of the plot in Book VI will be Harry meeting Godric through the medium of the Hat. Lupinlore From foxmoth at qnet.com Mon Nov 15 17:38:06 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2004 17:38:06 -0000 Subject: Lupin, (him only, really) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117919 > Pippin: > > If Remus is also called Wormtail, then JKR has not lied, she's hidden behind a double meaning. She is, after all, the person who had Dobby explain that telling Harry the diary plot didn't have anything to do with "He Who Must Not Be Named" was supposed to be a clue. << Nora: > I'm still getting hung up on one thing. So far, I don't think you've given a deeply compelling reason for why Remus Lupin, Moony, werewolf, would be called Wormtail, and dealt with the canonical existence of the actual Wormtail. It doesn't make sense unless it's highly artifical and deliberate obfuscation on the part of Voldemort. < Pippin: Well, of course it is! Remember that Star Trek movie where Captain Kirk had Uhura send a message to Headquarters in a code he knew the enemy had broken? Like Kirk, Voldemort uses a code word that the enemy will recognize, for the enemy is listening: "And I answer myself, perhaps they believed that a still-greater power could exist, one that could vanquish even Lord Voldemort...perhaps they now pay allegiance to another ... perhaps that champion of commoners, of Mudbloods and Muggles, Albus Dumbledore?" --GoF ch 33 Pettigrew appears unmasked before the assembled Death Eaters -- why, if not to convince everyone beyond a shadow of doubt that Wormtail the spy, the person Sirius overheard the DE's in Azkaban denounce as their betrayer, was indeed Pettigrew? Trouble is, I don't think he was. "In the old days he had huge numbers at his command; witches and wizards he'd bullied or bewitched into serving him, his faithful Death Eaters, a great variety of Dark creatures." --Sirius, OOP ch 5 Everything we see of Pettigrew puts him in the first category, but everything that we're told about the spy puts him in the second (or the third). The spy was supposedly Voldemort's second in command and he was active for an entire year. Yet Peter's health collapsed before Sirius or Crookshanks ever got near him. How could he possibly have served two masters, one of them in a position of great authority, for such a long time, without ever showing the strain? His animagus form would be a chameleon! Moreover, if what Fudge tells us is true, and Black's exposure as a double agent seemed to have been timed for the moment of the Potters' deaths, then the frame was planned in advance. The purpose of that would be so that the real spy could continue spying. The war would not have come to an end with Harry's death. There was still another prophecy child and Albus Dumbledore to deal with. It makes sense that Voldemort would try to preserve his spy by framing someone else. But Voldemort could hardly be sure that Sirius would not maintain his innocence and denounce Pettigrew as the secret keeper. That would make Pettigrew's position impossible, especially if his success depended on his being completely unsuspected. And if Pettigrew was supposed to fake his death to avoid this, he still wouldn't have been able to continue spying, so what was the point of framing Sirius? None -- unless Pettigrew was not the spy! Pippin From hautbois1 at comcast.net Mon Nov 15 18:22:09 2004 From: hautbois1 at comcast.net (ohnooboe) Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2004 18:22:09 -0000 Subject: The Nature of Galleons Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117920 Pardon if I've already made this post, or if we've already beaten it to death. Since the beginning of the series, I've been questioning the nature of money in the WW. We are told that the Weasleys are a poor family and the Malfoys are rich. These socio- economic dividers DO exist in the WW, but why? We've seen NUMEROUS examples of how magic supercedes money. Below are some (long winded) examples. I don't have any books with me so I can't reference them but I'll do the best I can. The Weasleys are a poor family. This we can see from the state of their robes, the slapdash engineering of The Burrow, etc. But why are they poor? Let's look only at the purchasables that fulfill physiological and safety needs...thank you Maslow...(I'll throw that in there so if the principal comes in I can say I'm writing for a scholarly journal! :) Food-It seems that food isn't all that hard to come by in the WW, even without money. In fact, at one point "a creamy sauce" comes pouring out of the tip of Mrs. Weasly's wand and into a pot. McGonnagal conjures sandwiches and cookies out of nowhere. Food just appears all over the place but where is it coming from? In the Great Hall we know if comes from the kitchens below; however, in these other circumstances are these people actually moving food from one place to another (we've seen no evidence) or is it actually being "conjured from midair"? If so, why waste the galleons on a joint of mutton when you can conjure the stew? Shelter-The Burrow seems to be held together only by magic. Hogwart's, we've speculated (or been told, I can't remember!), grows with the times, perhaps starting as a much smaller castle. Why, though, are some living better then others? Again, it seems that if chairs can be conjured from mid air (and entire Quidditch stadiums? GoF) why not homes? Or, save that, pieces of homes. Perhaps transfigure the dirt floor into a lovely parquet floor (though, I can't stand parquet!) Travel- Why is this an issue? Well, apparation is free, that we know of. Though we don't know the price, a handful of Floo Powder will seemingly take you anywhere that's hooked up to the Network. Is this an international Network? Intercontinental? If so, that's a lot of travel for the Galleon! Brooms are expensive, but even a slightly shoddy one will get the job done and once you have it, how much maintenance is involved? No fuel, no oil, etc. How about large party travel? In the RW, that can be rather expensive, planes, trains, buses, etc. Though, we've not heard of any British Broomways with outrageous round trips, we DO know that the Portkey is a good method of sending many people a long distance. It also seems that the only fee for Portkey travel is for the object used as the Key...and, really, how many galleons can an old shoe cost? My point is that magic takes the place of MANY of the things we, as unfortunate Muggles, are paying for. Electricity, gasoline, natural gas, etc. It's possible that taxes are paid to the MoM, but we don't know. Food can be created, travel is easy to come by, and even shelter can be made. No one has a monopoly on magic. Commonwealth Spellison and Ameri-charm aren't charging a sickle a spell (so far as we know...and for all you Brits, that was RIGHT funny! :) Magic is not a non-renewable resource; it's there in abundance and for the taking. So many of life's necessities can be created, or had in some way, through magic. That being the case, why the drastic economic divides? What are we (or maybe just I) missing about the nature of money in the WW? Patrick (who just used his whole planning period to write this post...) From ginnysthe1 at yahoo.com Mon Nov 15 18:36:09 2004 From: ginnysthe1 at yahoo.com (ginnysthe1) Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2004 18:36:09 -0000 Subject: =?iso-8859-1?q?Re:_JKR=92s_giant_mistake=3F_/_"Voldemort,"_not_"Voldy"?= In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117921 Kim here (after a break of a few days)... Thought I'd toss out this joke, FWIW: Stacey wrote: >Also, if I remember correctly JKR herself has stated that Voldemort should be referred to as Voldemort (not Voldie etc.) in fan discussions, as it is disrespectful to refer to him otherwise...< Katya replied: >On jkrowling.com under rumors, I found the following: "Erm... I was joking. I thought it was very amusing when I found a chatroom full of people calling him 'Voldy'..." Now Kim sings (off key -- aren't you glad this is in an email?): What's it all about, Voldie? Is it just for the moment we live? What's it all about, when you sort it out, Voldie? Are we meant to take more than we give, Or are we meant to be kind? And if only fools are kind, Voldie, Then I guess it is wise to be cruel. And if life belongs only to the strong, Voldie, What will you lend on an old Golden Rule? As sure as I believe there's a heaven above, Voldie, I know there's something much more, Something even Lords of Evil can believe in... I believe in love, Voldie. Without true love, you just exist, Voldie! Until you find the love you've missed, You're NOTHING, Voldie! When you walk, let your heart lead the way, And you'll find love any day, Voldie, Voldie, Voldie. See why it's such a good nickname? ;-) Kim From nkafkafi at yahoo.com Mon Nov 15 19:07:22 2004 From: nkafkafi at yahoo.com (nkafkafi) Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2004 19:07:22 -0000 Subject: HP: Mystery or Adventure? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117922 > Lupinlore wrote: > > > The words "mystery" and "adventure" are often used to characterize > the HP saga. However, these two kinds of stories have quite > different characteristics. I wonder if much of the argument over HP > in fan circles has to do with whether one approaches it more as a > mystery or more as an adventure? > Neri: I'm not sure JKR herself is completely decided about the proper balance between mystery and adventure. For example, as an adventure story the Shrieking Shack scene leaves a lot to be desired. Right there in the middle of the climax, Lupin takes a chapter or more to explain the MWPP backstory. It really hampers the development of the climax, IMO, but it is necessary for the mystery part, and the adventure climax is rectified by the following TT plot. But in other cases it seems that JKR sacrifices the consistency and detail of the mystery for the needs of the adventure plot effect, and then we get explanations that aren't completly satisfying, such as the explanation of the Mirror of Erised trick. I would add that a typical mystery story ends when the Sherlock Holmes type gathers the other characters, gives them the full explanation and reveals "who dunnit". In such a story the Holmes type and his faithful sidekick the Dr. Watson type are the main and important heroes, while all the rest are expendable (they usually change from one book to the other anyway). Therefore any of these side characters, which are usually pretty two-dimensional, might turn out to be ESE, including even characters that have a romantic or otherwise deep emotional relationship with the heroes. Thus the mystery readers of the HP saga expect DD to be the Holmes type, Harry to be the Watson type, and each book (especially the last) should end with DD solving the mystery in front of Harry (as I mentioned here before, this might be technically difficult in the Book 7 because DD might not be alive by then, exactly when we need him the most). This typical ending of the mystery story usually doesn't pack enough BANG for an adventure story, which requires a climax with lots of action and strong emotions. In such an active and emotional climax you don't have enough time for cerebral explanations of intricate mysteries. In addition, in the adventure story proper characters must have some integrity as well as complexity, so a complex character that displayed many good qualities can't turn out to be ESE just like that. He/she needs very deep and satisfying reasons for such a change, or it would feel artificial. Needles to say, the combination of DD & Harry doesn't work well as a classic Holmes & Watson combination. I would add that JKR is trying to do here something that was almost never done before in mystery stories (but I'm not an avid mystery reader so feel free to point me to the counterexamples): Creating a mystery that spreads over many books, with several years between them. Thus for the first time the fans actually have years to develop intricate theories, and every inconsistency in the mystery is likely to be overanalyzed. For example, if Lupin didn't take his potion at the night of the Shrieking Shack, or didn't notice Harry's invisibility cloak outside the willow (while Snape did), in the usual mystery book these wouldn't be much of a problem because we would be sure that by the end of PoA the mystery was solved once and for all. But in the HP saga we have more books to come. So should we think about these suspicious incidents as mysteries to be solved in later books, or are they merely means for the author to move the plot in the direction she wanted it? Neri From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com Mon Nov 15 19:16:16 2004 From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (arrowsmithbt) Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2004 19:16:16 -0000 Subject: Did DD lie about the Prophecy? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117923 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "dungrollin" wrote: > > Kneasy wrote: > > It was a not-so subtle warning. Because the Prophecy wasn't about > > Peter, it was about Sirius. > > > Have I missed it, or has anyone come up with a way of making > the '... chained these twelve years. Tonight, before midnight, the > servant will break free ...' fit with Sirius, who escaped from > Azkaban 10 months previously? > > Dungrollin > Who'll take a lack of response to mean 'no'. Of course. Fits better than with Peter, who was never chained at all. He could have left any time he wanted to. Post in preparation, maybe tomorrow, maybe Wednesday Kneasy From ginnysthe1 at yahoo.com Mon Nov 15 19:17:04 2004 From: ginnysthe1 at yahoo.com (ginnysthe1) Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2004 19:17:04 -0000 Subject: Harry's moral core vs. Voldie's In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117924 Kim had written: >Firstly, I don't think it's certain that Tom Riddle's mother was the one who named her son, as Carol suggests. She may have died before she could do that, she may not have known he would be a boy (although she could have picked out a boy's and a girl's name ahead of time, just in case). Maybe it was the birth attendant, the midwife, or someone else who named him after his father (which would mean they had to know who the father was). I admit it's all maybe.< Geoff replied: >If I may disagree, according to canon, she did: "You live in a muggle orphanage during the holidays, I believe?" said Dippet curiously. "Yes, sir" said Riddle,reddening slightly. "You are Muggle-born?" "Half-blood, sir," said Riddle. "Muggle father, witch mother." "And are both of your parents - ?" "My mother died just after I was born, sir. They told me at the orphanage she lived just long enough to name me. Tom after my father, Marvolo after my grandfather." (COS "The Very Secret Diary" p.182 UK edition) Geoff again: >Your idea of an attendant or midwife naming him would probably have been unlikely anyway, because they would also have had to have known the grandfather's name....< Kim now: Thanks again to someone who checks the books before they post (unlike yours truly who still offers the lame excuse that I didn't have the book with me at the time)! I tend to agree now based on what you quoted, that Tom Riddle's mother did name him before she died, although I guess we still could remain skeptical of the absolute validity of anything that's reported straight from TR's mouth (who is also reporting what was told to him by the orphanage). Nevertheless this could be one of those instances of there not being any reason to doubt what someone says, even if that someone is the young Lord Voldemort. As for the whether an attendant did or didn't know that TR's grandfather's name was Marvolo, that's still debatable. I'd actually thought of that too right after I'd posted. It all depends on who was there during the birth and also on who might have been in the vicinity (as in, in the next room, at the family mansion nearby, etc.) and known that the birth was taking place. I agree with you that it's not likely for a birth attendant to know the name Marvolo, but it was still quite possible. I can imagine a pregnant and probably very sick young Marvolo(?) girl (i.e. Tom R.'s mother, whose first name we don't know, do we?) in the throes of giving birth -- who was there with her? Did she give birth all alone? Not likely, or else when she died, baby Tom might easily have died too, and he obviously didn't. So what state of mind was she in, was she becoming delirious? Perhaps she had finally told her family (the Marvolos?) about her predicament, especially now that her husband had abandoned her? So maybe the attendant/midwife didn't name the baby, but someone who knew who the baby's grandfather was could have been nearby to name him. In any case someone had to have been there during or very soon after the birth for Tom Riddle Jr. to have been taken to an orphanage. Who took him to the Muggle orphanage? Just tossing that question out there, since I have no idea myself ;-) Kim From tim at marvinhold.com Mon Nov 15 19:34:48 2004 From: tim at marvinhold.com (Tim) Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2004 19:34:48 -0000 Subject: Winky's Future In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117925 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "katya752004" wrote: > > > So, is anyone else curious about the way things were left for this > poor heart-broken house elf? She was so upset when she believed > Crouch had to take care of himself, is she happier now that he's dead > and doesn't have to worry about dusting? Will she play a part in the > future or is she played out? Now that her family is dead, will she > accept one of Hermoine's malformed yarn projects? Will she ever get > over her butterbeer addiction? > > Thanks for any input! -- Katya I strongly suspect Dobby will play a part in the final battle. Winky I' doubt it. My fantasy is that Dobby becomes employed by Harry and that Winky redeems herself (in her own eyes) by attaching herself to the Weasleys Tim From ginnysthe1 at yahoo.com Mon Nov 15 19:51:10 2004 From: ginnysthe1 at yahoo.com (ginnysthe1) Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2004 19:51:10 -0000 Subject: Harry's moral core vs. Voldie's In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117926 Quick note from Kim: Snow wrote: >Ditto on the mothering attributes...if this is what actually happened? But... Young Tom Riddle was fed information about his early family, as was Harry. We know that Harry's information about his parents demise was falsified, why not Tom's? What do we actually know about Tom's parents? His father was rich and as snobbish as they come and his maternal grandfather's name was Marvolo who was a descendant of Salazar Slytherin. Everything else is conjecture! DiaryTom claims may not be substantiated. Yes, someone, presumably the orphanage, told Tom that his mother told them what his name was to be etc., but Harry was also told that 'his' parents died in a car crash. Harry believed his parents fate until he was told and proven otherwise. Likewise, I believe that Tom under similar (in a way best representative of the current circumstance) was told something to appease his questioning. Tom believed what he was told, as did Harry, and both were lied to for rationalizing purposes. I personally believe that Tom's mother lived, and may still be living, but was forced to choose between her son and his rejecting father or her wizarding world connection with the last of the pure royalty line of Slytherin.< >I am curious why everyone appears to take young Tom Riddle's facts, as were given to Tom at a young age, so seriously? This is muggle world (orphanage) vs. wizarding world, the Harry/Dursley world vs. the Dumbledore/wizarding world. The out and out lies of a muggle world that does not want to accept the wizarding world compared to the truth, and all it entails, that has been denied to both Harry and Tom; the wizarding world. ... Harry and Tom are more alike than maybe we realize or would like to admit. What is the difference between them and especially their mothers? ... It is the lack of information about Tom's mother and her past that allows me to question young Tom's beliefs that had been told to him. We, the readers, have at least been aloud a glimpse into what Harry's mother Lily was like through the eyes of her friends and teachers but the absence of Tom's mother's former information leaves me in denial of a truthful explanation from Tom's caretakers let alone to believe young Tom's second hand knowledge of the so called events.< Kim here: Ditto to Snow's ideas! I read her post after posting 117924 to Geoff on the same topic. I agree though that it's nice to think of Tom's mother loving her husband and son so much, but there's nothing in canon to say yay or nay to that idea. Somehow though, I think that if Tom Riddle's dying mother (if in fact she did die; as Snow suggests, she might still be alive) had so loved her son, and perhaps still loved the father of her son too, even though she died right after giving birth to baby Tom, that some of that love might have remained with Tom as he grew up. It's only a maybe, of course. But we certainly haven't seen even the smallest inkling of the experience of that love in the behavior of grown-up Tom, Lord Voldemort. Was it too little love, too long ago? Anyhow, I sure hope we find out some of the answers in HBP -- inquiring minds really want to know. ;-) Kim (who isn't a mother, but who does appreciate the feelings of those who are) From ginnysthe1 at yahoo.com Mon Nov 15 20:07:35 2004 From: ginnysthe1 at yahoo.com (ginnysthe1) Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2004 20:07:35 -0000 Subject: Brain room In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117927 Kjirstem wrote: >I found this the most disturbing room of the lot, I kept thinking Harry was going to find a label saying "Harry Potter" on the vat. After all, he has that scar. (And what's inside his head then? Marshmallow fluff? ) Like Maddy I was most bothered by the brains seeming alive. Some of the things I wonder about are whether they were obtained with their owners consent and what their existence in a vat means for those owners. Can they be "properly dead" if their brains are alive? ... As for who they are or used to be, maybe they're puppetmasters controlling the Wizarding World....or maybe they are just the WW equivalent of data backup.< Potioncat responded: >It reminded me of the old Frankenstein movies. And then it reminded me of "Igor" taking "Abby Normal's" brain after smashing the good brain (Young Frankenstein) ... But I still think it was a Think Tank. Except the brains didn't seem very nice.< Antosha responded: >Well, I must say, many think tanks seem less than nice. :-) ... I think the less literal approach is probably better here. I don't think that those were actual brains from actual people. They were some sort of manifestation of the mystery being studied in that room. We have to assume that the mystery involved is Thought, right?< Kim now: There was some discussion more or less recently, not sure when exactly, on a thread whose title I can't remember (hey, maybe they've got *my* brain in that tank swimming around... it seems to be missing from my cranium right now ;-)) about the possible contents of the locked room, but no one wondered at the time about the purpose of the contents of the other Dept. of Mysteries rooms. So that's a great question! The locked room contains "the mystery of mysteries" apparently, the time room contains the mystery of Time (I assume), so the Brain Room contains the mystery of Thought?? Definitely stands to reason! I'd only gotten about as far as thinking that the Brain Room contains a bunch of soggy, scary brains... Kim From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Mon Nov 15 20:17:09 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2004 20:17:09 -0000 Subject: Muggleborns choosing WW (was: Why did the founders retain Slytherin's house?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117928 Alla wrote : > > "Are you saying that muggleborns would prefer not to come to > > Hogwarts at all? That they would be happier if they won't > > discover their abilities?" Del replies : > Not all of them, but some of them. Why would they all want to switch > to the WW ? Is the WW so *objectively* better than the Muggle > World ? Or are they just made to *believe* that ? > > I can understand that the more talented Muggleborns would be happy > to finally discover why weird stuff keeps happening to them, and to > have an opportunity to actually make a life out of their special > talent. > > But I can imagine that many Muggleborns would also consider their > magical ability as only one part of their personality, and wouldn't > see the necessity to mold their entire life around that one trait. SSSusan: >From a purely practical standpoint, I can't imagine many Muggle-born witch-or-wizards *not* wanting to join the WW. I mean, just being able to have that doohicky of Molly's to keep track of my loved ones, to be able to shoot my dishes into the sink and have them wash themselves, to be able to apparate to work in an instant, to fly, .... I could go on & on! It makes many mundane parts of life simpler, and it adds spark & fun! And if after said witch-or-wizard "got to" the WW, s/he discovered problematic aspects of it, what's the difference between that and the RW? There is racism, tyranny, hatred, an AIDS epidemic, economic inequity, and all manner of other depressing problems in the RW. I don't see any difference, really, in the sense that there are problems in both worlds. If one is unhappy with things in *either* world, they can be addressed in the same manner: work for change. Siriusly Snapey Susan From foxmoth at qnet.com Mon Nov 15 20:18:44 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2004 20:18:44 -0000 Subject: HP: Mystery or Adventure? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117929 > Neri: > > I'm not sure JKR herself is completely decided about the proper balance between mystery and adventure. For example, as an adventure story the Shrieking Shack scene leaves a lot to be desired. Right there in the middle of the climax, Lupin takes a chapter or more to explain the MWPP backstory. It really hampers the development of the climax, IMO, but it is necessary for the mystery part, and the adventure climax is rectified by the following TT plot. But in other cases it seems that JKR sacrifices the consistency and detail of the mystery for the needs of the adventure plot effect, and then we get explanations that aren't completly satisfying, such as the explanation of the Mirror of Erised trick.< Pippin: Why do you find the Mirror of Erised trick unsatisfying? True, we can't yet tell how much PuppetMaster!DD had to do with it all, but that is the point since he will eventually be one of the suspects in Sirius's death, for those who realize that it has been staged as a mystery Neri: > I would add that a typical mystery story ends when the Sherlock Holmes type gathers the other characters, gives them the full explanation and reveals "who dunnit". In such a story the Holmes type and his faithful sidekick the Dr. Watson type are the main and important heroes, while all the rest are expendable (they usually change from one book to the other anyway). Therefore any of these side characters, which are usually pretty two-dimensional, might turn out to be ESE, including even characters that have a romantic or otherwise deep emotional relationship with the heroes. Thus the mystery readers of the HP saga expect DD to be the Holmes type, Harry to be the Watson type, and each book (especially the last) should end with DD solving the mystery in front of Harry (as I mentioned here before, this might be technically difficult in the Book 7 because DD might not be alive by then, exactly when we need him the most)., Pippin: I think the detective character is us. Harry/the narrator is our Archie Goodwin, reporting verbatim what he sees and feels, but not necessarily understanding all of it. Of course we aren't the only detectives on the case -- it's generally Hermione and Dumbledore who figure things out, and one of the challenges for us is to deduce how they did it. There isn't a traditional whodunnit scene -- instead the villain in his/her hubris confesses, and we get to see whether our guesses, if we troubled to make them, were right. I suspect most readers rush right past the moment when JKR gives us a cue that we have all the information we need and can deduce the identity of the villain instead of guessing. For example, ESE!Lupin is a guess -- logically I can't eliminate either Bella or Puppetmaster!DD from consideration as Sirius's murderer. I suspect it will be possible by the end of Book Seven, but only a paragraph or two before Rowling herself lifts the veil. At that point, one might as well keep reading. What makes it interesting is that Dumbledore and Hermione don't work from the same set of clues that we do, so like the potions puzzle in Book One, we have to work backward from the answer to find out what the clues were. But I suspect in Book Seven Harry will finally have to work things out without their help. The books works as mysteries on first reading, ie the characters know more than we do, and as thrillers after that, ie we know more than the characters. What makes this work is that the villain's exposure changes the entire meaning of the story. I had heard enough about the series to know that people were fascinated by Snape when I first read PS/SS. I was wondering why everyone thought this absurd cliche of a children's book villain was so intriguing right up until I read the words, "It was Quirrell." Since Rowling refers to clues and red-herrings when talking about her work, says that her readers can figure things out, and that we will understand everything at the end, we can conclude that things which are relevant to the plot, like why Lupin ran right past the invisibility cloak, will in the end be explained or at least be explicable. Much as we were all wondering how Harry got the map back, did anyone think it was going to have a bearing on the plot? Mark Evans, on the other hand, was not set up as a red herring, and needed a common name (WHY? notice she says she could have called him Smith or Jones, but doesn't suggest she could have called him Nackledirk) --so I think we have, in a devious way, been told what is significant about Mark Evans, certified nobody. Pippin From hautbois1 at comcast.net Mon Nov 15 20:26:45 2004 From: hautbois1 at comcast.net (ohnooboe) Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2004 20:26:45 -0000 Subject: Did DD lie about the Prophecy? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117930 Kneasy wrote: > > Fits better than with Peter, who was never chained at all. > He could have left any time he wanted to. Patrick Replies: Except that you may be underestimating the bond Peter had to LV. Why does an abused wife stay with an abusive husband? Fear? Love? Strange reasons, but probably Peter's reasons. > Post in preparation, maybe tomorrow, maybe Wednesday > > Kneasy Patrick: But I'll read your big post and then maybe change my mind! :) Patrick (who doesn't really need to sign this as he wrote his name 3 times...:) From foxmoth at qnet.com Mon Nov 15 20:32:12 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2004 20:32:12 -0000 Subject: Did DD lie about the Prophecy? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117931 > > Kneasy wrote: > > > It was a not-so subtle warning. Because the Prophecy wasn't about Peter, it was about Sirius.<<< Dungrollin: > > Have I missed it, or has anyone come up with a way of making the '... chained these twelve years. Tonight, before midnight, the servant will break free ...' fit with Sirius, who escaped from Azkaban 10 months previously? Kneasy: > Fits better than with Peter, who was never chained at all. He could have left any time he wanted to.< Pippin: Fits Lupin even better, since we have no idea where he was for twelve years. We do know he broke free from the chain holding him to Peter, and set out before midnight. Of course, he had to stop by the next day and pick up his belongings, including the grindylow cage. That would hold a rat, especially if you put an Unbreakable Charm on it. Pippin who will never finish writing the ESE!Lupin treatise if she doesn't stop finding more clues From boyd.t.smythe at fritolay.com Mon Nov 15 20:56:39 2004 From: boyd.t.smythe at fritolay.com (Smythe, Boyd T {FLNA}) Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2004 14:56:39 -0600 Subject: Did DD lie about the Prophecy? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117932 1st boyd wrote: >> "That leaves plenty of room for a most subversive reading of these prophecies: they're all a big fake-out. And a manipulative Dumbledore is the perpetrator, deftly using his partial knowledge of the future to nudge things in the right direction--with the 'prophecies.' I'm suggesting that he 'talks' through Sybill--a known seer-wannabe--to create bogus prophecies that meet his needs." << Then Del replied: > But my first question is : what was DD's need to tell Harry about LV's servant breaking free ? As we discussed previously, the knowledge of that prophecy didn't change anything in the way events happened that night. So what was the point? < > Unless, of course, you become really subversive and say that the only point of the servant-prophecy was to set a precedent, so that Harry would not even think of doubting the vanquisher-prophecy when he would hear it... < _______ Now boyd says: I can think of three reasons for DD to 'speak' a false prophecy through Sybill to Harry: First, from the author's perspective, it throws us off the scent nicely. But she may feel she clues us in a bit by making Sybill's voice and demeanor change--she is temporarily possessed, right? We just don't know if it is by some spirit...or a powerful wizard like DD. [BTW, extra credit for subversives who tackle the what-if scenarios of all of these predictions actually coming from LV or the ghosts of Salazar or Godric instead!] Second, DD may want *LV* to hear this bogus prophecy through Harry's connection!scar so LV will be convinced that Pettigrew is a true servant, when he is actually a double- (triple-?) agent for DD. Third, DD may want to be sure Harry accepts Sybill's prophecies so that when the MoM scene occurs in OoP, Harry'll buy the whole (bogus) setup. And so will LV, who will then expose himself in order to get the (bogus) first prophecy. This does make that whole scene a bit less hard to swallow. Dunno, maybe they're all right or all wrong, but at least I've got high, hot-apple-pie-in-the-sky hopes. --boyd And it is a rainy Monday here, which clearly has made me extra-subversive today. Or is it extra-insightful? Hmmm. From steve at hp-lexicon.org Mon Nov 15 21:16:20 2004 From: steve at hp-lexicon.org (hp_lexicon) Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2004 21:16:20 -0000 Subject: Pounds to Galleons (Was: Why did the founders...) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117933 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Alina wrote: > I'm not British, but the exchange rate doesn't seem unfair to me. > Considering that one Galleon is a lot more money than one pound. You can find an accurate Galleons-to-Muggle money convertor on the Lexicon. It's located here: http://www.hp-lexicon.org/wizworld/galleons.html Steve The Lexicon From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Mon Nov 15 21:26:22 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2004 21:26:22 -0000 Subject: Muggleborns choosing WW (was: Why did the founders retain Slytherin's house?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117934 > SSSusan: > From a purely practical standpoint, I can't imagine many Muggle- born > witch-or-wizards *not* wanting to join the WW. snip. > And if after said witch-or-wizard "got to" the WW, s/he discovered > problematic aspects of it, what's the difference between that and the > RW? There is racism, tyranny, hatred, an AIDS epidemic, economic > inequity, and all manner of other depressing problems in the RW. I > don't see any difference, really, in the sense that there are > problems in both worlds. If one is unhappy with things in *either* > world, they can be addressed in the same manner: work for change. > Alla: Oh, I agree very much Susan, I think that advantages for muggleborns joining WW are much greater than for them to stay away. What I am still not getting the satisfactory (for me ) answer is whether it is possible that non-human species did not want to do much with humans at all in the first place? And accordingly it went downhill from there. I am not saying that it was non-humans fault, but could it be that they started it? If it is racism of humans, then so be it and it definitely needs to be changed at the end of the series, IMO, but what if it is started as something different? I suppose it still could be racism, even if started differently. What is your opinion on this one? From susanadacunha at gmx.net Sat Nov 13 21:08:54 2004 From: susanadacunha at gmx.net (Susana Cunha) Date: Sat, 13 Nov 2004 21:08:54 -0000 Subject: DU treatment of Trelawney References: <20041113060821.95690.qmail@web51705.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <000601c4cb5e$00628f00$062f0dd4@taxi> No: HPFGUIDX 117935 Juli wrote: > I think the reason DU picked on Trelawney was that > she's a bad teacher, I mean she can't see the future > even if her life depended on it, sure she's made 2 > real prophecies, but I doubt DU knew anything about > them. "figgys26cats": I agree that she was really bad, however it seemed even more than that. It just seemed to me that DU had it in for her from the start. -------------------------------- I always assumed she was getting rid of all teachers that would support DD. She couldn't touch teachers like McGonagall or Flitwick on account of incompetence, but Trelawney was an easy prey. Susana From R.Vink2 at chello.nl Mon Nov 15 22:35:30 2004 From: R.Vink2 at chello.nl (Renee) Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2004 22:35:30 -0000 Subject: HP: Mystery or Adventure? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117936 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "lupinlore" wrote: > > > The words "mystery" and "adventure" are often used to characterize > the HP saga. However, these two kinds of stories have quite > different characteristics. I wonder if much of the argument over HP > in fan circles has to do with whether one approaches it more as a > mystery or more as an adventure? > Personally, I think HP moves between mystery and adventure. However, > it is likely that there are times when we think JKR is writing > adventure that she is engaged in crafting a mystery, and also many > times when we are sure we are dealing with a mystery of great import > when in fact JKR is giving us an adventure story. Thus arise a good > many of our confusions and disappointments. And thus arise a good > many of our criticisms of JKR, that is we often feel she has played > dirty with mysteries when she was writing adventure, and we often > expect because she was doing one thing in a particular circumstance > she will do it in another (i.e. if x is important why isn't y?). > Renee: You've got some very good points here. I hope I'm not making things more confusing by adding a third genre to the mix: fantasy. Though it's obvious the HP saga isn't a conventional fantasy tale set in some never-never land, it contains elements usually not found in mysteries or conventional adventure stories, such as magic and non- human sentient beings. Also, fantasy tales often make abundant use of symbolism and archetypes, and it seems to me HP is no different in this respect. It is, for instance, particularly strong in - (medieval Christian) symbolism: phoenix, stag, unicorns and snake (the basilisk). Harry frequently descends into the underworld to resurface more or less victoriously. Many characters have symbolical names. Etc. And it doesn't stop at mystery, adventure story and fantasy: the books also have a satirical element demanding an approach of its own, and I'm sure others could come up with different genres yet. In short, to analyse and interpret the books the way they deserve, it won't do to slap a label on them and then proceed to unravel them in terms of that particular genre alone; they have to many layers. The ideal interpretation, IMO, would be one that does justice to all the different elements these books are composed of and succeeds in harmonising them. Renee From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Mon Nov 15 22:45:21 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2004 22:45:21 -0000 Subject: Muggleborns choosing WW (was: Why did the founders retain Slytherin's house? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117937 SSSusan wrote : "From a purely practical standpoint, I can't imagine many Muggle-born witch-or-wizards *not* wanting to join the WW. I mean, just being able to have that doohicky of Molly's to keep track of my loved ones, to be able to shoot my dishes into the sink and have them wash themselves, to be able to apparate to work in an instant, to fly, .... I could go on & on! It makes many mundane parts of life simpler, and it adds spark & fun!" Del replies : Let me go over your examples first. The clockwork : it doesn't seem to be a common household object. I seem to remember that someone speaks about it in a way that implies that not everyone has one. Personally, I've found that mobile phones are quite useful to keep track of my loved ones. The dishes washing themselves : Muggles have dishwashers. Apparate to work : granted, that one would be cool. Floo Powder isn't bad either. Flying : Muggles have cars, which all in all are about as practical as brooms. All in all, Muggles do manage to compensate for their lack of magic. Spark and fun ? Those are bound to diminish after a while, once you get used to them. And I personally find the price to pay quite high. * Getting cut off from your family. You and your parents have to lie to your friends and the rest of the family about what school you go to, what job you have, and so on. Your parents don't even know what is actually happening at your school. If you marry a wizard-born, you might never be able to introduce him/her and your in-laws to your Muggle family and friends. You can't have people coming over if they don't know about your secret. * Having to abandon whatever you liked in Muggle life. You liked video games or you wanted to become an astronaut ? Forget about it. Worse : what about things like religion ? I personally wouldn't let my kid go to a school where he couldn't attend our church on Sunday. * Having to keep your own existence a secret. You have to masquerade any time you go outside in the Muggle world. You have to hide your real activities from anyone and everyone. You have to carefully monitor your kids whenever you go to a Muggle place, in fear that they might do or say something incriminating. * Having to deal with the anti-Muggle racism and the pureblood ideology. On one side, you are taught that you are somehow better than everyone else in your family, and on the other you will be despised all your life by some of the most influent members of your chosen society. And all that for what ? For the right to live in a society that is about as rotten as the one you came from, where most jobs are about as dull and boring as the ones you would get in the Muggle World, and where the sparks include much more dangerous accidents happening to your kids (no matter that they are more resistant). I agree that being a wizard in the Muggle World wouldn't be much easier. I'm just saying that I don't see why we should assume that all Muggleborns necessarily want to remain in the WW. Del From nkafkafi at yahoo.com Mon Nov 15 22:59:41 2004 From: nkafkafi at yahoo.com (nkafkafi) Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2004 22:59:41 -0000 Subject: HP: Mystery or Adventure? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117938 > > Pippin: > > Since Rowling refers to clues and red-herrings when talking > about her work, says that her readers can figure things out, and > that we will understand everything at the end, we can conclude > that things which are relevant to the plot, like why Lupin ran > right past the invisibility cloak, will in the end be explained or at > least be explicable. > Neri: So do you think that JKR will also reveal, somewhere in the next two books, the mystery of what was Snape doing for five hours while Harry and Co where having their trip to the DoM? And if so, in what situation will this mystery be revealed? Neri From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Mon Nov 15 23:07:29 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2004 23:07:29 -0000 Subject: Muggleborns choosing WW (was: Why did the founders retain Slytherin's house? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117939 > Del replies : snip. > And all that for what ? For the right to live in a society that is > about as rotten as the one you came from, where most jobs are about as > dull and boring as the ones you would get in the Muggle World, and > where the sparks include much more dangerous accidents happening to > your kids (no matter that they are more resistant). Alla: Nope, not for that. For the possibility of having your unique gift developed, even if it means that you will endure a lot of hardships in this new world. I can very easily find the real life reflection of such situation - immigration. Myself and my family had been through a lot (just as all immigrants, we are definitely not unique in that) when we came to America, but I am not exaggerating, when I am saying that every moment of suffering had been worth it. I had very little possibilities of developing my gifts and abilities in my country. Just as muggleborns have no possibilites of developing their gift of magic in "our" world. From dontask2much at yahoo.com Mon Nov 15 23:58:46 2004 From: dontask2much at yahoo.com (charme) Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2004 18:58:46 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Sirius's Future/death References: <20041115023956.92935.qmail@web53103.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <003501c4cb6f$0c135b20$6701a8c0@MITRE.ORG> No: HPFGUIDX 117940 From: "Juli" > Are you suggesting Lupin may have killed Sirius? I > just can't believe that, they were best friends, and > they still cared for each other (I'm thinking of the > Shrinking shack, Remus is in no way like Pettigrew, he > didn't become friends with the marauders to get their > protection, he just wanted friends. And we see it even > in OoP, like when Harry tells them Snape has stopped > teaching him Oclumency, Sirius wanted to give Snape a > piece of his mind, but Remus stopped him, why? because > he knew that if Sirius went to Hogwarts the MoM or the > DEs would get him, and he just couldn't handle it. > I don't believe in ESE!Lupin, he's just a nice guy > with bad luck. > > I think Sirius died because he crossed the veil, Bella > didn't AK him, it was a a red ray, not a green, so he > could have been alive when he crossed over, so maybe > HUGE MAYBE, he could come back, and as much as I would > like it, I don't see it happening. > charme: I'm suggesting that the possibility exists that someone other than Bellatrix uttered the curse that hit Sirius and caused him to fall through the Veil. I am also suggesting the canon is not as definitive about Lupin's action prior to his interdiction with Harry after Sirius fell through. I'm not suggesting Lupin is evil, just curious about who HE was dueling in the DoM - most, if not all, the other participants are paired. charme From foxmoth at qnet.com Tue Nov 16 00:00:27 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2004 00:00:27 -0000 Subject: HP: Mystery or Adventure? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117941 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "nkafkafi" wrote: > > > > > Pippin: > > > > Since Rowling refers to clues and red-herrings when talking about her work, says that her readers can figure things out, and that we will understand everything at the end, we can conclude that things which are relevant to the plot, like why Lupin ran right past the invisibility cloak, will in the end be explained or at least be explicable. > > > > Neri: > So do you think that JKR will also reveal, somewhere in the next two books, the mystery of what was Snape doing for five hours while Harry and Co where having their trip to the DoM? < Pippin: There's no mystery. He was writing the chronicle of the Missing Twenty-four Hours. Neri: >And if so, in what situation will this mystery be revealed? Pippin: I expect Harry will be, as usual, cornered by the real villain, who will explain how he has once again managed to delay Snape. By then, Harry will probably have persuaded himself that Snape murdered Sirius while hidden in the missing invisibility cloak. But this time Harry will put two and two together himself, and force the murderer to confess. Pippin From red_rider4 at lycos.com Tue Nov 16 00:22:58 2004 From: red_rider4 at lycos.com (Hester Griffith) Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2004 00:22:58 -0000 Subject: Founders as Wizarding Government In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117942 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "lupinlore" wrote: > > > In a recent post Steve (bboymin) brought up the issue of whether Hogwarts is a Private or Public School (American sense of those terms). This got me to thinking about the Founders and their role in their society. In addition, we have never heard anyone talk about paying tuition at Hogwarts, Hester: Yes, we have. Harry discusses it briefly with Hagrid when he first learns about Hogwarts > it seems likely that Hogwarts is supported in whole or at least in the great majority by government funds. Hester: That is quite possible, but more likely any influence of the MM is through the board of directors. > Now, how could this come about? Perhaps the Founders were the closest thing Wizarding Britain had to a government circa 1000 A.D. Given that they are described as the four greatest wizards of their age, that would make sense. Perhaps they functioned as a sort of combined executive, with Hogwarts being their primary governmental project. Hester: I always immagined it being founded prior to the organization of the MM. This would have been the middle ages and most magical folk would have been in smaller communities and there wouldn't have been so much need to hide from muggles. It would probably have been about the time muggles started fearing magic. > One interesting corollary to this would be to give further weight to the idea that the Half-Blood Prince is in fact Godric Gryffindor. Maybe part of the plot in Book VI will be Harry meeting Godric through the medium of the Hat. > Lupinlore Hester: That is interesting. Perhaps something like the pensieve or Riddles diary. I personally don't hold with the theory of the hbp being GG, but have no basis in cannon for disbelieving this or for my theory of the hbp being Flamel. Whoever the HBP is, it would certainly be interesting to have a view of Hogwarts at its inception. Hester From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Tue Nov 16 00:25:54 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2004 00:25:54 -0000 Subject: Muggleborns choosing WW (was: Why did the founders retain Slytherin's house? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117943 SSSusan wrote : "From a purely practical standpoint, I can't imagine many Muggle-born witch-or-wizards *not* wanting to join the WW. I mean, just being able to have that doohicky of Molly's to keep track of my loved ones, to be able to shoot my dishes into the sink and have them wash themselves, to be able to apparate to work in an instant, to fly, .... I could go on & on! It makes many mundane parts of life simpler, and it adds spark & fun!" Del replies : Let me go over your examples first. The clockwork : it doesn't seem to be a common household object. I seem to remember that someone speaks about it in a way that implies that not everyone has one. Personally, I've found that mobile phones are quite useful to keep track of my loved ones. The dishes washing themselves : Muggles have dishwashers. Apparate to work : granted, that one would be cool. Floo Powder isn't bad either. Flying : Muggles have cars, which all in all are about as practical as brooms. All in all, Muggles do manage to compensate for their lack of magic. SSSusan: These were tip-of-the-tongue examples. I could come up with a HUNDRED others. Even for these few examples, however, I can "argue" right back: dishwashers require prep work, btw, and there are many things which can't go into them?fine crystal, copper-bottom pots. I don't CARE if Molly's clock is rare. It's representative of the neat-o kinds of things one finds in the WW. As for flying, it's not practicality at all that I would be enjoying; it's the FREEDOM and SOARING and sheer JOY of them. I didn't say Muggles don't manage to compensate for their lack of magic; I was saying that there are delightful things and oodles of conveniences which could make the Wizarding World wonderful, too. Del: Spark and fun ? Those are bound to diminish after a while, once you get used to them. And I personally find the price to pay quite high. SSSusan: And that's your opinion. I, on the other hand, doubt that the spark & fun would wear off. WHY would they diminish over time? I'm still delighted with my TV set, for goodness' sake, and I've had TV my whole 43 years. Del: *Getting cut off from your family. You and your parents have to lie to your friends and the rest of the family about what school you go to, what job you have, and so on. Your parents don't even know what is actually happening at your school. If you marry a wizard-born, you might never be able to introduce him/her and your in-laws to your Muggle family and friends. You can't have people coming over if they don't know about your secret. SSSusan: This might be a high price, yes. And secrecy would be a part of it. For some that might be more than they're willing to accept, I'll grant. But I don't agree that it's a given that one must give up one's family. Seamus' parents are a witch & a Muggle. Hermione's parents are both Muggles. They don't seem to have stopped participating in each other's lives. And of course you can have people over if they don't know about your secret?just don't do any magic while they're there! Harry goes back to the Dursleys each summer, walks around the neighborhood. Sure, he blows up his aunt now & again but it's not like he can't spend any time amongst the Muggles. Del: * Having to abandon whatever you liked in Muggle life. You liked video games or you wanted to become an astronaut ? Forget about it. Worse : what about things like religion ? I personally wouldn't let my kid go to a school where he couldn't attend our church on Sunday. SSSusan: Well, video games *are* gone, but that's no loss to me. NO way, though, I agree that religion must be given up. Just because JKR has made no overt reference to it does not mean it isn't nor cannot be a part of the WW. Again, as I said previously about problems which exist in either world?that you can work to change things in either place?so you can bring your beliefs to that world. Who could stop you?? Start a church if there isn't one. Visit your old RW church on Sundays if you like. I don't think magic "leaks out" of people without provocation very often, so I can't imagine one couldn't go to a Muggle movie theater or church or shops when one chose. Del: * Having to deal with the anti-Muggle racism and the pureblood ideology. On one side, you are taught that you are somehow better than everyone else in your family, and on the other you will be despised all your life by some of the most influent members of your chosen society. SSSusan: I attempted to address this previously. Racism and hatred and "pureblood ideology" are be a part of RW life as well. From my view of the U.S., I don't think the WW is ANY worse in terms of attitudes--of rich towards the poor, of prejudice against persons of color, of prejudice against gays and lesbians. So I say WORK to change it, whichever world in which you find yourself, plain and simple. Del: I agree that being a wizard in the Muggle World wouldn't be much easier. I'm just saying that I don't see why we should assume that all Muggleborns necessarily want to remain in the WW. SSSusan: Oh, I'm not assuming that *everyone* would want to remain there, but I just don't see any reason to assume there would be lots clamoring to get out, either. I think if the average Muggle-born witch or wizard found out about his abilities at age 30 or 45, then there would be LOTS more who'd opt out. But finding out as 11-year-olds, just ready to head off to boarding school perhaps anyway, it's not "too late" in terms of what all is in place. Again, JMHO. Siriusly Snapey Susan From willsonkmom at msn.com Tue Nov 16 00:44:00 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2004 00:44:00 -0000 Subject: Muggleborns choosing WW (was: Why did the founders retain Slytherin's house? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117944 > SSSusan: > Oh, I'm not assuming that *everyone* would want to remain there, but > I just don't see any reason to assume there would be lots clamoring > to get out, either. I think if the average Muggle-born witch or > wizard found out about his abilities at age 30 or 45, then there > would be LOTS more who'd opt out. But finding out as 11-year- olds, > just ready to head off to boarding school perhaps anyway, it's > not "too late" in terms of what all is in place. > > Again, JMHO. > > Siriusly Snapey Susan Potioncat: I don't think very many would choose to stay Muggle, but I guess some would. Just like some choose to live very simple lives in the midst of our busy ones. But I would think sometime during Hogwarts the decision would be made. And either the student would give up their wand and go home or there would be some memory adjustment done to the student and family. No wand no magic...to speak of. Potioncat: who recalls this list deciding that alfredo sauce from a wand would be non-caloric and that's reason enough to stay in the WW. From houseofbohacek at earthlink.net Tue Nov 16 00:46:11 2004 From: houseofbohacek at earthlink.net (klyanthea) Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2004 00:46:11 -0000 Subject: (FILK) Sirius Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117945 Long time, no filk, eh? Remember me? Sirius A filk by Gail B. done to the tune of Two Of Us by the everlovin' Beatles Midi is found here (although it doesn't play through the whole song like the original) : http://tinpan.fortunecity.com/vanishing/958/beatles.htm Harry: Sirius in my Vision, my decision is to call Through the floo, I am seeking; Kreacher's speaking, suggests it is so It isn't a show. Was caught by the foe Not long ago I'm anxious, telling my friends, now it depends upon us Certain he is in danger, but then Granger tries to tell me no But what does she know? They'll deal his deathblow I have to go! Voldemort's my enemy, gave to me the scar that is on my forehead Dolores Umbridge angry, but somehow we escape her Acting on my volition, on a mission, my friends all follow Playing the hero, I feel my fear grow We can't be slow Dumbledore has an army, that is who we are and so we go ahead Few of us riding Thestrals, just like kestrals through the sky Nearing our destination, in formation, as does fly the crow London is below, landing in shadow I cry out, "Whoa!" (We're going to go You'd better believe it Good-bye) -Gail B. From ginnysthe1 at yahoo.com Tue Nov 16 01:01:25 2004 From: ginnysthe1 at yahoo.com (ginnysthe1) Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2004 01:01:25 -0000 Subject: The Riddles' Murders (WAS: The only one he ever feared? In-Reply-To: <20041111112409.35894.qmail@web52909.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117946 Kim asked: >And I'll toss out this last question: who do you think taught young Tom Riddle how to perform an Avada Kedavra?< JP replied: >I think that Tom had "theoretically" known how to use the AK Curse, you know, knowing the incantation and everything... ... the user must mean it... savor the pleasure of hurting or killing someone in order to use it properly. And I think that Tom Jr did: he meant to kill his family, and following logically the attitude of the present day Voldy, had the pleasure of doing so.> Kim replies: I see what you're saying, but I was wondering specifically *who* taught young Tom the Unforgiveable Curses? Not that I really have any idea myself. Learning AKs, etc. would seem to require more than looking in a book, even for a gifted student. And at Hogwarts at least, these curses are pretty much forbidden, aren't they, despite the fact that Moody!Crouch taught them in GoF? So maybe learning Unforgiveables was part of an "underground movement" among the bad students (bad, as in mean and nasty), similar to the way "the Marauders" had to learn how to become animagi without the knowledge of their professors. But studying Unforgiveable Curses on one's own would have to be kept even more hushed up than studying animagus transfigurations, because of the shear illegality of Unforgiveables. Maybe TR and friends found outside help in their studies from unsavory types, whoever they may have been. Something to ponder anyway! Cheers, Kim From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Tue Nov 16 01:21:39 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2004 01:21:39 -0000 Subject: Muggleborns choosing WW (was: Why did the founders retain Slytherin's house? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117947 Alla wrote : "Nope, not for that. For the possibility of having your unique gift developed, even if it means that you will endure a lot of hardships in this new world." Del replies : Magic is in no way a unique gift in the WW, since it is by definition shared by all other wizards. Moreover, this magical gift is not the ONLY thing that defines a wizard. What about all their other talents, all their other abilities ? Being magical is only ONE talent, and I really don't see why it should take precedence over all the other characteristics of each wizard. Alla wrote : "Myself and my family had been through a lot (just as all immigrants, we are definitely not unique in that) when we came to America, but I am not exaggerating, when I am saying that every moment of suffering had been worth it. I had very little possibilities of developing my gifts and abilities in my country. Just as muggleborns have no possibilites of developing their gift of magic in "our" world." Del replies : No offence meant, but the two cases are widely different. You had very little possibilities of developing ANY (or very few) of your talents and abilities in your country. Muggleborns have no possibilities of developing ONE of their talents and abilities in the Muggle World. Big difference. Moreover, I wasn't even talking about *developing* one's talent, but about shaping one's life around one's talent. Does every musically talented child choose to become a music professional, even if they get musical education and opportunities ? No. Does every drawing talented child choose to go to Arts School and to become a professional painter or anything ? No. Some do. Many do. But not all, far from it. Many are happy to develop their talent, but don't choose to make it the center of their life. They have other interests, other ambitions. Couldn't it be the same for quite many Muggleborns ? Del From ginnysthe1 at yahoo.com Tue Nov 16 01:45:17 2004 From: ginnysthe1 at yahoo.com (ginnysthe1) Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2004 01:45:17 -0000 Subject: The source of TR/LV's evil nature (continued?) Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117948 In addition to musing about Tom Riddle's (Voldemort's) birth and early childhood, I've been wondering too if it were possible that he was spurned by a girl while he was a student at Hogwarts. Maybe that was the straw that broke the camel's back, so to speak. I mean, what could have induced him to finally run (walk? crawl?) all the way to his father and grandparents' house in Little Hangleton at the particular time that he did? Sure, if he'd known about them, he'd probably hated them all along, but why go kill them when he was 16 or 17 and apparently still in school? By that age, of course, he was old enough to really succeed at AKing someone, so maybe that was all the inducement needed, but was he also so sociopathic by the time he was, say, 5 or 6 years old, that he never even entertained any interest in girls, even when he became a teenager? In a way, it would explain (to me, anyway) the unexplained reason for his initial reluctance to kill Lily Potter at Godric's Hollow. Maybe she reminded him of his first "love." (Of course, maybe I'm still under the influence of seeing the recent medium-that-must-not-be-named version of Nicholas Nickleby on video -- any other Dickens fans see a slight resemblance between the personalities of Ralph Nickleby and Voldemort? Heartless old Ralph clearly cared for no one, but he did have just a trace of affection for his niece Kate. Oh well, I last read the novel many years ago, so I don't know for sure if the film version took liberties in interpreting the characters...) Also, there's the frightening, not to mention nauseating, thought that Voldemort may have had a love-child (hate-child?) that he's unaware of, sometime over the years, despite the general belief that he's the last heir of Slytherin. After all, even evil old Salazar must have found time for "romance" or he wouldn't have *had* any heirs. Any thoughts, anyone, on any of the above? Kim From carolynwhite2 at aol.com Tue Nov 16 02:03:58 2004 From: carolynwhite2 at aol.com (carolynwhite2) Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2004 02:03:58 -0000 Subject: Who knows? DD knows, that's who. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117949 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, a paranoid Barry Arrowsmith wrote: >OK. It's that Prophecy again. >There it sat on a shelf in the Ministry, gathering dust, complete >with it's own little label dated 16 years previously - "S.P.T. to >A.P.W.B.D. Dark Lord and (?)Harry Potter. Carolyn: I think it is a very interesting question what is going on in the Hall of Prophecies. For a start, it appears that the keeper must know what the prophecies contain, otherwise how could he have re-labelled the orb ? If he doesn't, and was only acting on instructions, who told him to re-label? Dumbledore? How convenient. And what a great job. Snooping around all those shelves with a duster, pursing your lips over so-and-so prophecy: `ha..they won't like it when their number comes up wonder if he's still alive that was a crap seer, always gets things wrong .serve `em right ' Bet the Keeper gets bought a few lunches. But does it stop at a nod and a wink? Worryingly, of the four people we have had identified as working in the Department of Mysteries (Bode, Croaker, Rookwood, Avery), two are DEs, and a third was easily Imperioed, then murdered. The fourth is unpromisingly called 'Croaker' ? who's he destined to talk to? But, intriguingly, neither Rookwood nor Avery felt inclined to tell their master what went on at the Department before they ended up in Azkaban all those years ago. Why not? It would have saved Voldie a lot of grief if he'd been able to hear the prophecy in its entirety before GH, but from the evidence of Harry's dreams, Voldemort did not even have a clear mental picture of what the Department of Mysteries looked like until they explained it to him 16 years later (Ch 26, OOP). Even then, Avery got some crucial facts wrong, and delayed Voldemort's plans by many months. Could it be that both were/are hedging their bets because they knew something more powerful than the Dark Lord was emerging from the research department ? What does the Department of Mysteries do anyway? FB&WTFT mentions that, unlike the other six departments at the MoM, it is possibly not answerable to the Department of Magical Law Enforcement (the largest department at the Ministry, under Fudge's direct control). So, who does it answer to? Effectively, it's a secret intelligence service, pursuing its own agenda, collecting prophecies about future events from around the WW. Who is on the circulation list for the analysis reports? Probably not Fudge. A security risk if there ever was one. Bet he's only been cleared for need-to-know, deniable information. But Dumbledore? Probably acts as a specialist advisor, even though he's not formally on the staff. And then there are the clandestine research activities. The time room. The brains floating in tanks. The locked room. Could they have finally discovered something more powerful than magic ? DD certainly hints that that's the case: 'a force that is at once more wonderful and more terrible than death, than human intelligence, than the forces of nature.' Crikey; hope they've put in for a Ludicrous Patent up on Level 7. And apparently, whatever this force is, our Harry has it in spades: 'That power took you to save Sirius tonight. That power also saved you from possession by Voldemort, because he could not bear to reside in a body so full of the force he detests...it was your heart that saved you.' Queue stirring music. Now, this is all very touching, that Harry cares for Sirius enough to die for him, but like Lily's sacrifice before that, he's scarcely the first human being to feel such emotions about someone he loves, surely? Why can't anyone else kill Voldie? Why should these well- known human responses identify only him as the nemesis of one of the most powerful dark wizards the WW has ever known? Well, not to disappoint Harry or anything, but in truth it's all a bit beside the point. It is probably more useful to view the Possession incident rather as a lab test, where DD is checking a hypothesis about the way Harry and Voldemort are likely to interact. Look at the calm way he says 'Are you all right?' to Harry, after the boy has experienced the equivalent of the electric chair. After pulling Harry to his feet, there's not even a brief hug, or manly clap on the shoulder. An 'apparently satisfied' DD moves on promptly to dealing with Fudge. It's a pretty clinical reaction. The outcome of an experiment had been correctly predicted; the subject had responded as expected. Yes, yes, it's probably all true that Harry has a particular innate ability to focus his emotional energy, and that's something that hurts this particular Dark Lord real bad. Stands to reason really, he's scarcely human, and has lodged a chunk of himself in Harry's head which is probably helping to fine-tune the effect. What with the research department as back up, they'll find a Final Solution at some point. If necessary, the back-up, Neville Longbottom could be put on as a substitute if Harry backs out. Dumbledore's seen it all before. He's getting to be an expert on evil overlords, and the latest incarnation isn't really proving that much of a challenge to such an experienced bomb disposal expert. DD thought Tom might be a harder nut to crack, since he'd taught him himself originally, but Voldy's making all the mistakes in the book. Kneasy: >>>Two things - 1. DD knows much more than he's let on so far, 2. I bet there's more to come about prophecies; I bet there's another one somewhere, probably from Cassandra Trelawney. >>> Carolyn: In fact when you think about it, isn't Dumbledore doing rather too well? Effortlessly, it seems he's a step ahead all the time. Sitting up there in his office, sucking sherbet lemons. He's been proved right about Voldie and as a result, can kick ass at the Ministry. They've only lost Sirius so far, who was a liability anyway. The kid's a bit upset, granted, but, hey, welcome to the real world; he needs to grow up. Various key players are all in position ? the rat, Snape. He has a good idea who might try to betray him, or be unequal to their task. Voldy, by contrast, is on his knees. None of his best curses work on the brat, his wand's about as much use as stick of celery, and even his trademark speciality, Possession, has left him with some nasty burn marks all over his nice new hands. Most of his top team are (temporarily) banged up in Azkaban; he's trapped in a cave somewhere having to listen to the ravings of lunatic Bella, and he also still doesn't know what's in the prophecy, dammit. The only people he can rely on are the Dementors, and frankly they are not great company. But are we so very sure that we understand what Dumbledore is up to ? People are fond of insisting that `he's the epitome of goodness', as though no further explanation is required. Hm. By that is meant, perhaps, a person adhering to higher moral values, who always tries to do the right thing? Who wouldn't be satisfied with just killing Tom Riddle and knows there are things much worse than death ? That sort of stuff can go to your head, you know, understanding so clearly what is right and what is wrong, especially when there are few people to argue with you. He is also old, very, very old, and extremely tired. In practical terms, despite being such a Good Person, his efforts at trying to steer the WW into becoming a more acceptable society frankly haven't come to much. In fact, he's really beginning to wonder what's the point of it all, if the WW never learns. And then there's a couple of other prophecies to consider: ''..at the solstice will come a new..' said the figure of an old bearded man' `...and none will come after'..said the figure of a young woman.' Over the years these factors have persuaded him to believe the WW is doomed, and the Right Thing, the Best Thing would be to help speed its end. He has laid his plans accordingly. He intends to wake the sleeping dragon under Hogwarts, and whilst it is defending the school in the coming battle against Voldemort, he will destroy the source of all magic that it was guarding. Meanwhile, Lucius and Rookwood are scheming to use the force in the locked room at the MoM to zap Voldy themselves. And, as in all the best thrillers, a confused, but honourable schoolboy will get caught in the crossfire, and eventually determine the course of events at the cost of his own life. Carolyn Who thinks Kneasy is a bad influence From ginnysthe1 at yahoo.com Tue Nov 16 02:20:23 2004 From: ginnysthe1 at yahoo.com (ginnysthe1) Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2004 02:20:23 -0000 Subject: Qualification to previous post (117948) Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117950 In my previous post I stated: "... but was he (Tom Riddle) also so sociopathic by the time he was, say, 5 or 6 years old, that he never even entertained any interest in girls, even when he became a teenager? ..." Just for the record, in case anyone objects, I didn't mean to imply that a teenage boy who isn't interested in girls is necessarily a sociopath. Some teenage boys may still not be ready for relationships yet, or they may be interested in other boys. What I was implying was that Tom Riddle may have been the sort of person who even at an early age already despises everyone and everything so deeply that he'd be totally unmoved by *any* form of love by the time he was a teenager. That may not be the standard definition of sociopath either, but I hope you get my drift... Cheers, Kim From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Tue Nov 16 02:22:21 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2004 02:22:21 -0000 Subject: Muggleborns choosing WW (was: Why did the founders retain Slytherin's house?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117951 SSSusan: > > From a purely practical standpoint, I can't imagine many Muggle- > > born witch-or-wizards *not* wanting to join the WW. > snip. > > And if after said witch-or-wizard "got to" the WW, s/he > > discovered problematic aspects of it, what's the difference > > between that and the RW? There is racism, tyranny, hatred, an > > AIDS epidemic, economic inequity, and all manner of other > > depressing problems in the RW. I don't see any difference, > > really, in the sense that there are problems in both worlds. If > > one is unhappy with things in *either* world, they can be > > addressed in the same manner: work for change. Alla: > Oh, I agree very much Susan, I think that advantages for > muggleborns joining WW are much greater than for them to stay away. > > What I am still not getting the satisfactory (for me ) answer is > whether it is possible that non-human species did not want to do > much with humans at all in the first place? And accordingly it > went downhill from there. I am not saying that it was non-humans > fault, but could it be that they started it? > > If it is racism of humans, then so be it and it definitely needs > to be changed at the end of the series, IMO, but what if it is > started as something different? > What is your opinion on this one? SSSusan: Wow. I wish I knew what my opinion was, Alla, but I'm not sure I've thought enough about this particular possibility to have much of one. I suppose we can assume, from FB as well as the HPs, that centaurs elected to separate themselves from humans. But goblins? The history of the house elves? Giants? Who knows? I defer to others with deeper thoughts on this! Siriusly Snapey Susan From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Tue Nov 16 02:27:56 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2004 02:27:56 -0000 Subject: Muggleborns choosing WW (was: Why did the founders retain Slytherin's house? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117952 SSSusan wrote : " I don't CARE if Molly's clock is rare. It's representative of the neat-o kinds of things one finds in the WW." Del replies : I dunno, I just don't find it that neat. Honestly I think that if DD sent me a letter telling me that they overlooked me and I'm a witch, I wouldn't be very tempted to enter the WW. I don't care much for "gadgets" and most of the WW doesn't strike me as warm and welcoming, even the Burrow, with its ghoul in the attic, and its gnomes in the garden. They are nice to read about, but I wouldn't want them in my house. SSSusan wrote : " As for flying, it's not practicality at all that I would be enjoying; it's the FREEDOM and SOARING and sheer JOY of them." Del replies : Just because Harry feels that way doesn't mean everyone does. Neville, for one, doesn't seem to. I probably wouldn't either (I'm scared of heights). And I don't find it so free when you have to make sure that no Muggle is going to see you. SSSusan wrote : "I, on the other hand, doubt that the spark & fun would wear off. WHY would they diminish over time? I'm still delighted with my TV set, for goodness' sake, and I've had TV my whole 43 years." Del replies : Wow ! I'm impressed, honestly ! The excitement of new things tend to wear off quite quickly for me. There are exceptions, like good books and movies, but that's usually when there's an emotional involvement. SSSusan wrote : "But I don't agree that it's a given that one must give up one's family. Seamus' parents are a witch & a Muggle. Hermione's parents are both Muggles. They don't seem to have stopped participating in each other's lives." Del replies : I'm not sure I remember well, but isn't it Seamus who said that his mum told his dad about being a witch only after they got married ? That would tend to mean that she was living as a Muggle (at least on the surface) when they were dating. And do Seamus's dad's parents know about their daughter-in-law and grandson being magical ? As for Hermione, there was a thread some months ago about how separated from her parents she seems to have become to some readers. And we don't know if her grandparents know about her being a witch either. As for Dean's parents, they don't even know about some critical things going on in their son's life at Hogwarts. We don't even know if they know about *LV*. SSSusan wrote : " And of course you can have people over if they don't know about your secret?just don't do any magic while they're there!" Del replies : Easier said that done ! That might be OK when people are over for the week-end, but what do you do when your sister comes over for 3 weeks with her family ? When she wants to see where you work ? When she wants to see where your kids go to school ? When she starts looking in the photo albums, or in your book collection ? And most of all : when she wonders why you don't even have electricity in your home ??? SSSusan wrote : " NO way, though, I agree that religion must be given up. Just because JKR has made no overt reference to it does not mean it isn't nor cannot be a part of the WW." Del replies : If you're a Muggle, and your child goes to Hogwarts, and he doesn't get any religious education or doesn't attend any religious service for 10 months a year throughout his adolescence, chances are that he won't turn out very religious in the end. That would be a major no-no for me. JMHO, Del From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Tue Nov 16 02:31:13 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2004 02:31:13 -0000 Subject: Muggleborns choosing WW (was: Why did the founders retain Slytherin's house? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117953 > Del replies : > Magic is in no way a unique gift in the WW, since it is by definition > shared by all other wizards. Alla: It is a unique gift in "our" world as defined by Rowling, the gift which cannot be developed in such world. Del: > Moreover, this magical gift is not the ONLY thing that defines a > wizard. Alla: I think it is the MAIN thing which defines a wizard. Of course they have different talents, but that is who they are, without magic, they are not wizards. > Del: No offence meant, but the two cases are widely different. > > You had very little possibilities of developing ANY (or very few) of > your talents and abilities in your country. Muggleborns have no > possibilities of developing ONE of their talents and abilities in the > Muggle World. Big difference. Alla: You see those two cases as different, I see them as quite similar (or as similar as it is possible to draw metaphorical comparisons between phantasy book and RL). I could not get a college education I wanted in my country, because I am a Jew. Muggleborns cannot learn about magic in muggle world, because no such schools exist. I think the comparison is quite close, not 100%, of course, but close. But hey, what do I know about MY life, right? :o) Del: > Moreover, I wasn't even talking about *developing* one's talent, but > about shaping one's life around one's talent snip. > Does every drawing talented child choose to go to Arts School and to > become a professional painter or anything ? No. > > Some do. Many do. But not all, far from it. Many are happy to develop > their talent, but don't choose to make it the center of their life. > They have other interests, other ambitions. > > Couldn't it be the same for quite many Muggleborns ? Alla: I compare magic to something akin to breathing (or quite similar),something without which magical person could not exist. Not necessarily physically, but spiritually. I don't know , hard to explain. If you compare magic to the gift of drawing or music, I would compare it only with very gifted children, I would say genuises. Yes, many people could exist without developing their music abilities, but some cannot exist without music in their life. In my imagination magic is such gift, in yours I guess it is not stronger than any other abilities. Could be, but I disagree with such interpretation. From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Tue Nov 16 02:37:52 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2004 02:37:52 -0000 Subject: What started separation between human and non-human species in WW? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117954 > SSSusan: snip. I suppose we can assume, from FB as well as the HPs, that > centaurs elected to separate themselves from humans. But goblins? > The history of the house elves? Giants? Who knows? > I defer to others with deeper thoughts on this! Alla: Oh, please, Susan. :o) Your thoughts are deep enough for me. :) Goblins are VERY interesting case, me thinks. I wish Harry paid more attention to the stories about Goblins rebellions. I bet we could learn A LOT of interesting information from there about where it all started. From antoshachekhonte at yahoo.com Tue Nov 16 02:41:01 2004 From: antoshachekhonte at yahoo.com (antoshachekhonte) Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2004 02:41:01 -0000 Subject: The Nature of Galleons In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117955 > Pardon if I've already made this post, or if we've already > beaten it to death. Since the beginning of the series, I've been > questioning the nature of money in the WW. We are told that the > Weasleys are a poor family and the Malfoys are rich. These socio- > economic dividers DO exist in the WW, but why? We've seen NUMEROUS > examples of how magic supercedes money. Below are some (long winded) > examples. I don't have any books with me so I can't reference them > but I'll do the best I can. > > The Weasleys are a poor family. This we can see from the > state of their robes, the slapdash engineering of The Burrow, etc. > But why are they poor? Let's look only at the purchasables that > fulfill physiological and safety needs...thank you Maslow...(I'll > throw that in there so if the principal comes in I can say I'm > writing for a scholarly journal! :) > > Food-It seems that food isn't all that hard to come by in the > WW, even without money. In fact, at one point "a creamy sauce" comes > pouring out of the tip of Mrs. Weasly's wand and into a pot. > McGonnagal conjures sandwiches and cookies out of nowhere. Food just > appears all over the place but where is it coming from? In the Great > Hall we know if comes from the kitchens below; however, in these > other circumstances are these people actually moving food from one > place to another (we've seen no evidence) or is it actually > being "conjured from midair"? If so, why waste the galleons on a > joint of mutton when you can conjure the stew? > > Shelter-The Burrow seems to be held together only by magic. > Hogwart's, we've speculated (or been told, I can't remember!), grows > with the times, perhaps starting as a much smaller castle. Why, > though, are some living better then others? Again, it seems that if > chairs can be conjured from mid air (and entire Quidditch stadiums? > GoF) why not homes? Or, save that, pieces of homes. Perhaps > transfigure the dirt floor into a lovely parquet floor (though, I > can't stand parquet!) > > Travel- Why is this an issue? Well, apparation is free, that > we know of. Though we don't know the price, a handful of Floo Powder > will seemingly take you anywhere that's hooked up to the Network. Is > this an international Network? Intercontinental? If so, that's a > lot of travel for the Galleon! Brooms are expensive, but even a > slightly shoddy one will get the job done and once you have it, how > much maintenance is involved? No fuel, no oil, etc. How about large > party travel? In the RW, that can be rather expensive, planes, > trains, buses, etc. Though, we've not heard of any British Broomways > with outrageous round trips, we DO know that the Portkey is a good > method of sending many people a long distance. It also seems that > the only fee for Portkey travel is for the object used as the > Key...and, really, how many galleons can an old shoe cost? > > My point is that magic takes the place of MANY of the things > we, as unfortunate Muggles, are paying for. Electricity, gasoline, > natural gas, etc. It's possible that taxes are paid to the MoM, but > we don't know. Food can be created, travel is easy to come by, and > even shelter can be made. No one has a monopoly on magic. > Commonwealth Spellison and Ameri-charm aren't charging a sickle a > spell (so far as we know...and for all you Brits, that was RIGHT > funny! :) Magic is not a non-renewable resource; it's there in > abundance and for the taking. So many of life's necessities can be > created, or had in some way, through magic. That being the case, why > the drastic economic divides? What are we (or maybe just I) missing > about the nature of money in the WW? > > Patrick (who just used his whole planning period to write this > post...) Antosha: I believe this point has been made, but it seems likely that even magic can't make something from nothing. Conjuration--Molly's sauce, Dumbledore's chairs, the sandwiches in CoS, etc--are likely simply removed from somewhere else. That being the case, it seems likely that there are rather strict rules about what you can appropriate from where and how. Likewise, Transfiguration seems to work best if the source and target are of similar value and size. The greater the difference, the more difficult the magic--Transfiguring metal to gold or life to immortality is only possible, for instance, with the Philosopher's Stone, which only one wizard has managed to make in the last seven hundred years. Look at what the Transfiguration Potions, of course, require raw materials, and one can expect that the laws of supply and demand would operate here. Too, most Charms, Potions and Transfigurations don't seem to be permanent. Go ahead and change that dirt floor to polished oak, but expect to have to do it over and over-- again, the more drastic the change, the shorter seems to be the duration. THerefore, material wealth is in fact, helpful. To be able to buy and trade the things you want with other wizards, you need something that they'll accept; precious metals are valuable in their own right--difficult to create, hard to find--and an accepted form of currency. Think of the Leprechaun gold.... From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Tue Nov 16 02:41:38 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2004 02:41:38 -0000 Subject: Muggleborns choosing WW (was: Why did the founders retain Slytherin's house? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117956 SSSusan wrote : > > " As for flying, it's not practicality at all that I would be > > enjoying; it's the FREEDOM and SOARING and sheer JOY of them." Del replies : > Just because Harry feels that way doesn't mean everyone does. > Neville, for one, doesn't seem to. I probably wouldn't either (I'm > scared of heights). And I don't find it so free when you have to > make sure that no Muggle is going to see you. SSSusan: Well, we've seen things differently before, Del, we do again now, and I suspect we will again. :-) So I'm only going to address this one bit before calling it a night. I'm talking about *me*, first of all, when I write of soaring and joy and freedom. I didn't say, anywhere, that everyone would feel that. I started out and was continuing to provide examples of why I would enjoy the WW. But still, I think I'm not alone in this. It's not a scientific experiment or anything , but on another, much smaller HP group I'm part of, I once asked "If you could have one magical talent, what would it be?" Of all who responded, only one *didn't* say "flying." Now, that could be a woeful lack of creativity on people's part...or it could be that lots of people think flying would be great. Siriusly Snapey Susan...who really is pretty silly [nerdy?] in terms of staying excited about things like TV, cell phones, the amazement of finding quick answers on Google and the start of every Cubs baseball season. From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Tue Nov 16 02:53:41 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2004 02:53:41 -0000 Subject: Muggleborns choosing WW (was: Why did the founders retain Slytherin's house? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117957 Alla wrote : "I compare magic to something akin to breathing (or quite similar),something without which magical person could not exist. Not necessarily physically, but spiritually. I don't know , hard to explain." Del replies : Several points in canon actually supports your view, like the fact that wizards live longer than Muggles, or the fact that they are much more resistant to injuries. I must admit this bothers me, because basically what it implies is that wizards are something like a different species. They are not the same type of humans as Muggles are. But in a society loaded with contempt for other species and half-breeds, such a concept could actually justify the Muggle-racism and the pureblood mentality. We're not getting anywhere, are we :-) ? Del From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Tue Nov 16 03:00:05 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2004 03:00:05 -0000 Subject: Muggleborns choosing WW (was: Why did the founders retain Slytherin's house? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117958 SSSusan wrote : " It's not a scientific experiment or anything , but on another, much smaller HP group I'm part of, I once asked "If you could have one magical talent, what would it be?" Of all who responded, only one *didn't* say "flying." Now, that could be a woeful lack of creativity on people's part...or it could be that lots of people think flying would be great." Del replies : :-) Reminds me of what I read once in a test to determine if your original character in a fanfiction is a Mary Sue : if he/she has the exceptional ability to fly in a world where it's not a common thing, then that's one sign that he/she might be a Mary Sue. Flying is apparently a very common wish. No offence meant though : I'm not saying you're ridiculous unoriginal or anything ! I'm just saying that you're actually probably quite right and that flying must be attractive to many readers. Del From kelsey_dangelo at yahoo.com Mon Nov 15 21:30:10 2004 From: kelsey_dangelo at yahoo.com (Kelsey Dangelo) Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2004 13:30:10 -0800 (PST) Subject: Sirius' Future In-Reply-To: <1100519188.5880.88331.m12@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <20041115213010.47148.qmail@web53105.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 117959 JP here: I also don't believe that Sirius is dead. First, the spell that hit Sirius is not the usual green of the AK, and the Canon never said what spell it was. Second, before the fighting, Harry and the gang saw the veil moving, so it must mean that many souls are passing by this veil. (Take note: Souls.) Sirius went through the veil flesh and bone... and I think that it just transported Sirius somewhere else. (Just like Dante's Inferno, Purgatorio, and Paradiso.) I think that there will be a Chapter in HBP that will end in Harry in trouble, then Sirius out of nowhere saves him. And the next Chapter will tell of Sirius' Journey Through the Veil (probably tell Harry that he met his James and Lily inside the Veil). Kelsey: I know this has been debated to death, but ooo! My heart leapt up, imagining Sirius flying in (slow motion, of course, possibly on motorcycle), ragged black hair flying behind him, attacking unknown-as-yet beast that is hurting Harry. (Imagine something similar to Aragon flying in with flaming torch and singing sword at Weathertop in LOTR FOTR film, though never thought of Aragon as hot before). I never thought of his return in this way. But yes, that man can make an entrance (thinking behind the door, thinking black dog hanging out in Hogsmeade, thinking yelling at screaming mum portrait). My personal theory is that Harry has to journey into the underworld, Sirius is his "guide" or his purpose, but that Harry will have to leave Sirius in the underworld. I think this because Sirius now represents, for Harry, Voldie's weaknesses (death and love), so he'll be important for the end of Voldie. Sirius is not gone, but he is. Although I'm not sure if falling into the underworld (land of the dead) would kill someone, I have a feeling that JKR would (i.e. she wants Sirius dead). In mythology, staying in the land of the dead certainly can become hazardous to one's health. The curse combined with the veil probably killed Sirius. It just feels so final at the end of OOP. But I do love the idea!!! Kelsey, who thinks of Sirius as the Obi-Wan Kenobi character (i.e. died ambiguous death, will return, but dead guilt-ridden best friend of father-of-hero, guide and parallel to hero). __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Tue Nov 16 03:26:33 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2004 03:26:33 -0000 Subject: Muggleborns choosing WW (was: Why did the founders retain Slytherin's house? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117960 SSSusan wrote : >> " It's not a scientific experiment or anything , but on another, much smaller HP group I'm part of, I once asked "If you could have one magical talent, what would it be?" Of all who responded, only one *didn't* say "flying." Now, that could be a woeful lack of creativity on people's part...or it could be that lots of people think flying would be great."<< Del replies : > :-) Reminds me of what I read once in a test to determine if your > original character in a fanfiction is a Mary Sue : if he/she has > the exceptional ability to fly in a world where it's not a common > thing, then that's one sign that he/she might be a Mary Sue. > Flying is apparently a very common wish. No offence meant though : > I'm not saying you're ridiculous unoriginal or anything ! I'm just > saying that you're actually probably quite right and that flying > must be attractive to many readers. SSSusan: No offense taken, since I've never penned even one page of fanfic. :- ) I *would*, however, like to fly, so maybe that makes me a different kind of creature from a Mary!Sue...a Mary!Susan?? I was just struck by a funny thought--I say I would like to fly, but I also know I'd never ever sky dive. I guess flying a broom seems safer somehow?!? Hmmmm. Maybe it *is* the safety of fantasy land over RW.... Siriusly Snapey Susan From kelsey_dangelo at yahoo.com Tue Nov 16 04:22:25 2004 From: kelsey_dangelo at yahoo.com (Kelsey Dangelo) Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2004 20:22:25 -0800 (PST) Subject: Does Snape really like Draco? In-Reply-To: <1100320306.3582.99539.m21@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <20041116042226.58935.qmail@web53101.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 117961 Kristen writes: Hi I'm new to this, but Pippin's suggestion got me thinking about the relationship between Snape and Draco; and I'm left wondering. Is Snape favoring Draco is an act? Or does he really like Draco. (Sorry if this is a duplicate thread). Kelsey: Just to add some fuel to the fire about Snape perhaps liking Draco. Perhaps he doesn't see Draco as a bully. Perhaps he (biased by his own experience) sees Harry as the bully to Draco. 1. Snape has, shall we say, a bit of a problem letting go of the past. He's constantly reliving the "worst" memories of being tortured by James and company. To him (and Harry), Draco is a sort of reprise of his own school days. Of course, he's going to be partial to Draco. 2. Draco says at the end of GOF, that Harry is back to being "Dumbledore's favorite". Hmm, that sounds a lot like Snape's feelings of sibling rivalry for Dumbledore's attention with Harry. Maybe Snape understands Draco's feelings of jealousy for attention, and so indulges Draco. 3. How many times does Harry unfairly get the upper hand or get away with something, while Draco does not? For instance, when Lupin bails out Harry. Draco runs to Snape for attention, but Harry often isn't even punished, when both Draco and he were in the wrong. Not to mention all the rewards Harry receives (not that I don't think he deserves them). 4. The Father thing. I think that's worth a mention. Draco certainly is treated as a pawn as he sucks up any attention his father passes his way. OTOH, Snape seems to have reacted against his paternal abuse, Draco reacts towards it. I'm leaving out the argument that Snape has to pretend to hate Harry for Draco's father because I think that Snape is enjoying treating Harry bad too much for that to be the reason. [But, if he really is Lucius' lap dog...] Now, I don't like Draco at all. And I can't understand why Snape would like him (but when have I ever understood the ways of Snape?). But I must say that, when it comes to Draco, I think that Snape is doing the right and teacherly thing. Sometimes, you can attract more students to the Light Side with honey than with vinegar. Not that I'm saying that Draco is going to be redeemed. <<>> Ooo, very intriguing! Especially considering Snape must hate his DE years and Malfoy almost as much as James. But maybe it has nothing to do with fathers. Maybe Snape hates Harry just for who he is, and likes Draco for the potential Draco has. Kelsey, who hates Draco (doesn't pity him at all) but turns into squishy fan-girl in front of Snape. __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Meet the all-new My Yahoo! - Try it today! http://my.yahoo.com From bex753 at yahoo.co.uk Mon Nov 15 12:14:21 2004 From: bex753 at yahoo.co.uk (Bex) Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2004 12:14:21 -0000 Subject: Sirius's Future References: <20041115100725.67873.qmail@web52905.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <047201c4cb0c$a35e7860$6401a8c0@quietpc> No: HPFGUIDX 117962 > JP wrote: > I also don't believe that Sirius is dead. First, the spell that > hit Sirius is not the usual green of the AK, and the Canon never > said what spell it was. If you read that passage again it says Sirius ducks Bellatrix's jet of red light. He then taunts her and a second jet of light hit him squarely on the chest. (No colour mentioned so could be red or green.) Bex From ccaracciolo at nyc.rr.com Mon Nov 15 17:47:39 2004 From: ccaracciolo at nyc.rr.com (carolcaracciolo) Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2004 17:47:39 -0000 Subject: JKR's writing in OoP (was Re: Sirius's Future) In-Reply-To: <20041114.223746.432.10.annegirl11@juno.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117963 ---annegirl11 at j... wrote: >> I'm going to make an extreme statement here: Sirius' death was bad writing. Sirius' story is so ridiculously, over-the-top tragic that killing him at the pit of his depression is a cop-out. It's soapy, it's lazy writing, and it's a waste of a complex, interesting character. The writing in Foot, particularly towards the end, is not JKR's best. The point I'm trying to make is that if JKR had a plan for the significance of Sirius' death, she didn't pull it off. As a reader, I was not convinced that Sirius' death impacted Harry in some positive, life-lesson way. Cedric's death impacted me in a dramatic way; Sirius' was contrived and obvious. << Carol says: Wow! I'm sure I'm breaking the cardinal rule of posting by just agreeing with Aura but...Wow! I certainly thought I would be thoroughly flamed if I suggested that OOtP was not JKR's best writing...I'm so glad someone agrees! In every other HP book, I can point to events and their context with authority. OOTP seems like a foggy memory...and I've read it three times! After my initial reading, I felt like it wasn't the same author. The style seemed wrong. Characters were acting in ways that were not in keeping with the people we had known up to that point. The only two parts that really rang with JKR's prints were the first chapter with the Dursleys and Fred and George's Bon Voyage. After it was over, I didn't feel like she had propelled the story any further along. We're, in a VERY basic way, in the same situation we were in at the end of GoF...LV is back and we have to fight him. Yes? As far as Sirius is concerned, I was deeply disappointed. He promised to be a character much like Snape. Complex...not easily pinned down as far as his basic make up. Is he inherently good or evil? Many would point to his good deeds and sacrifices and say "good". However, in Snape's Pensieve we see a Sirius who acts very much like Draco...a bit of a show-off, bully who relies on his group for back up and picks on the outcast. This is a good thing because it makes him a multi-dimensional character. To kill him off at this point in the story seemed extremely contrived...like an exclamation point in an otherwise mediocre book. I hate that this is my first post but...c'est la guerre! Carol P.S. I love this group! I really enjoy intelligent discussion of these books. Thanks for letting me participate! From jlnbtr at yahoo.com Mon Nov 15 18:32:01 2004 From: jlnbtr at yahoo.com (Juli) Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2004 10:32:01 -0800 (PST) Subject: Trelawney - real seer or not? (was Re: DU treatment of Trelawney) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041115183201.57245.qmail@web53110.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 117964 > Juli: > > I can't help myself, but I remeber when she tells > > Harry he must have been born in the middle of the > > winter, that's just so funny. > > Finwitch: > Well... she's for the future, not the past. And > midwinter does not need to refer to 21.12. or January > or February. It could possibly mean at the height of > the Dark rule or even nt. (Whatever that would > mean, new time?) I've never thought of that, when LV was strongest and killing and tourturing at will, it was winter, many years of winter, just like many people think of the Middle Age, it was the winter of history, then came the Spring (Rennaissance), with its flowers, art and so on. But, Harry wasn't born in the middle of this 'winter', he was born towards its end, only a year before springtime. Sure, it was the height of LV's power, it is usually the middle the height of a power, first it's the begining, the creation of the empire, then its point of ultimate power is the middle, and when its power is the decreasing is the end of the empire. Juli From jlnbtr at yahoo.com Mon Nov 15 18:39:42 2004 From: jlnbtr at yahoo.com (Juli) Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2004 10:39:42 -0800 (PST) Subject: CHAPTER DISCUSSION: Chapter 31, O.W.L.s In-Reply-To: <20041115092713.39213.qmail@web52906.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041115183942.21503.qmail@web53109.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 117965 (Most of the post by JP snipped) > 7. Do practical and written exams each count as an > OWLS? > JP: > No, I dont believe that the written and practical > exams each count as an OWL. I think that the exams > has a certain percentage to the total amount of > points needed to achieve an A, EE or an O grade. I > think that the percentage is 50 - 50 : 50% for > written exam and 50% for practical exam. The points > acquired in both exams are then averaged and the > result will determine the OWL grade. That is why I > think that Harry will get his Auror subject next > school year. (see question no. 3) But then how could someone get 12 OWLs? I'm talking about Barty Crouch Jr and Bill Weasley, they both got 12 OWLs, and we know you can't have so many classes, even Hermione couldn't handle more than 8 classes in PoA, so how could anyone take 12? Juli From jlnbtr at yahoo.com Mon Nov 15 19:05:52 2004 From: jlnbtr at yahoo.com (Juli) Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2004 11:05:52 -0800 (PST) Subject: Harry taking credit for wht he didnt do... Message-ID: <20041115190552.41397.qmail@web53109.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 117966 TheMuffinMan: > "'You're going to pay,' said Malfoy in a voice barely > louder than a whisper,'I'm going to make you've done > to my father...' > > 'Well, I'm terrified now,' said Harry sarcastically, > 'I s'pose Lord Voldemort's just a warm up act for you > three...'" > > The way Harry gloats in front of Draco, He tries to > make it seem like HE fought Voldie, when really when > faced with the dark lord he froze up and had to be > saved by Dumbledore! I've always hated the fact that > Harry said this, I'm not sure why, but I've kind of > lost a little respect in Harry after this. SO what's > everyone's opinion in this?? Juli: Sorry to answer this post soooo late, but an idea just came to my mind, what if Harry was just trying to make Draco angrier? "Yeah, I sent your dad to Azkaban and I'm not sorry for it, you think you can hurt me? If Voldemort couldn't, how will you?" If someone who I hate tells me "I'm not afraid of you, not even a bit", it would make me much angrier, so I believe that's Harry's motive, to make Draco curse him so he can do it back without looking so guilty. Juli From jlnbtr at yahoo.com Tue Nov 16 00:37:20 2004 From: jlnbtr at yahoo.com (Juli) Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2004 16:37:20 -0800 (PST) Subject: Sirius's Future/death In-Reply-To: <003501c4cb6f$0c135b20$6701a8c0@MITRE.ORG> Message-ID: <20041116003720.81608.qmail@web53105.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 117967 > charme: > I'm suggesting that the possibility exists that > someone other than Bellatrix uttered the curse > that hit Sirius and caused him to fall through > the Veil. I am also suggesting the canon is not > as definitive about Lupin's action prior to his > interdiction with Harry after Sirius fell through. > I'm not suggesting Lupin is evil, just curious > about who HE was dueling in the DoM - most, if > not all, the other participants are paired. OK, sorry, I thought you were suggesting that it was Lupin who cursed Sirius and made him cross the veil. I've never thought about who was Lipin dueling with, for me it was more important Sirius crossing the veil, but probably it wasn't Bella, Sirius was surprised as he fell, if he was dueling with Bella it shouldn't be so weird that she hit him, so maybe his surprise was because someone else cursed him. Juli From erinellii at yahoo.com Tue Nov 16 06:08:32 2004 From: erinellii at yahoo.com (Erin) Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2004 06:08:32 -0000 Subject: Lupin, (him only, really) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117968 > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "pippin_999" > wrote: > > > Pippin: > > If Remus is also called Wormtail, then JKR has not lied, she's > > hidden behind a double meaning. She is, after all, the person > > who had Dobby explain that telling Harry the diary plot didn't > > have anything to do with "He Who Must Not Be Named" was > > supposed to be a clue. Erin: It's a good thing you're not a politician, Pippin! The world would be in some serious trouble if you were arguing the meaning of the word "sex", what exactly was meant by a "lie", and who "Wormtail" really was. Nope, I just don't buy it. By this reasoning, we could declare that Draco sometimes calls himself "Ron", and that Harry therefore spends half his time buddying up to his enemy from Slytherin. Any passage without an explicit description of Ron, it must really be Draco!! And there's no canon to disprove it! Lupin could perfectly well be ESE without committing every single one of the murders. Could be, mind. He's not, but that's another post. --Erin From bboyminn at yahoo.com Tue Nov 16 08:52:52 2004 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2004 08:52:52 -0000 Subject: Why did the founders retain Slytherin's house? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117969 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "lupinlore" wrote: > > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Steve" wrote: > > > > > > Private schools of this nature are almost always created on > > benevolent> grants and endowments by the founders. That means that > > one forth of the school belongs to Slytherin by virtue of the fact > > that he paid for it. > > > lupinlore: > > I am assuming you are using "private school" in the American use of > the term (i.e. Public School vs. Private School). Now, the problem > is, given that use of the term, Hogwarts isn't a private school. It > is clearly managed by the Ministry, to the point that the Ministry > has the right to appoint faculty and determine curriculum. One > assumes that means it is also largely supported by government funds. bboyminn: Yes indeed, I should have been more careful about using the term 'Private School'. Of course, from my context you can see that I meant privately /funded/ school, meaning that private individuals fund the school, as opposed to a publically funded school which is funded by the public-at-large through taxes. As a side note, even publically funded universities, and to some more limited extent primary and secondary schools, in the USA receive substantial portions of the operating revenue from private endowments, grants, and donations. If the founders left an endowment in the form of a Trust, as well as immediate cash, land, & buildings for short term operation, that Trust would be managed in a way that generates substantial interest and revenue that would keep the school operating. A very small amount of money invested wisely and compounded over 1,000 years would yield a large fortune by any standard. The school may also generate revenue in other ways like doing magical research and consulting for individuals and private companies. All speculation, of course, but the doesn't stray very far from the real world operation of schools. Next, and most important, the Wizard Government doesn't run Hogwarts. They were able to interfere with the operation of Hogwart in ways that served their own interest. But governments in the real world can interfere with just about anthing they choose. Note the particular interference at Hogwarts wasn't done as a matter of normal order, it was done by the passing of special laws and decrees. Laws which are now rescinded. I will add that the government probably has a hand in 'qualification' standards for OWLs and NEWTs. In the real world schools of this nature are run by the Headmaster, who has substantial powers, and the Board of Governors. In addition, I further speculate, once again, that they way you get appointed to the Board of Governors is to make a substantial donation to the school. Since you now have a substantial vested interest in the school, you get to have some say in how the school assests, and to some extent, how the school is managed. In a broader sense, it is the Board of Governors job to manage the school Endowment Trust, to invest it wisely, and make sure it isn't squandered. The model I have outlined is very close to real world schools, and does expain why students apparently aren't require to pay tuition. Note most ancient wizards in general fiction took on several apprentices, those apprentices were not require to pay the Master wizard for their education. In ancient times this might have worked fine, but as the wizard world grew it became impractical to pick up new apprentices here and there as you happen to stumble across them, as a result, Howarts School was born. > lupinlore continues: > > ...edited... > > One way to explain this is that the Founders may well have been the > closest thing the British Wizarding World had to a government circa > 1000 A.D. If they were indeed the four most powerful wizards of > their time, that would have been logical. ...edited... > > The idea that the Founders may have been the government of their era > is supported if you are one of those who suspects Godric Gryffindor > will turn out to be the Half-Blood Prince. > > Lupinlore bboyminn: I don't think the Four Great Wizards were the government exactly. One thousand years ago was a pretty lawless and feudal time. In addition, only the most elite were educated. Further, I suspect wizards in were a law unto themselves which may have contributed to their persecution; we hate what we fear. I will agree that at the Four Greatest Wizards were probably extremely prominent, influential, powerful, and wealthy individuals with reputations that spread across Europe. In that regard, they probably had a great deal of influence and control over the wizard world in general, but I speculate that was based on personal power, education, and status, and not on formal government positions. A great deal of speculation, but speculation that is reasonably modeled after the real world. Steve/bboyminn (was bboy_mn) From bboyminn at yahoo.com Tue Nov 16 09:08:41 2004 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2004 09:08:41 -0000 Subject: Founders as Wizarding Government In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117970 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "lupinlore" wrote: > > > In a recent post Steve (bboymin) brought up the issue of whether > Hogwarts is a Private or Public School (American sense of those > terms). This got me to thinking about the Founders and their role > in their society. > lupinlore: > > Hogwarts seems to me to be a Public School (American sense). The > Ministry clearly has ultimate control over the place, to the point > of appointing faculty and determining curriculum. In addition, we > have never heard anyone talk about paying tuition at Hogwarts, and > at seems unlikely that many families, for instance the Weasleys, > would be able to do so. Given all this, it seems likely that > Hogwarts is supported in whole or at least in the great majority by > government funds. > > ...edited... > > Lupinlore bboyminn: Sorry for the short post, just wanted to point back to the original thread where I addressed some of these issues. Subject: Re: Why did the founders retain Slytherin's house? http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/117969 I have posted extensive theories on this in the past, but I'm not on my own computer and I don't have DSL, so things aren't working very well. Steve/bboyminn From imamommy at sbcglobal.net Tue Nov 16 09:42:45 2004 From: imamommy at sbcglobal.net (imamommy at sbcglobal.net) Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2004 09:42:45 -0000 Subject: Harry taking credit for wht he didnt do... In-Reply-To: <20041115190552.41397.qmail@web53109.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117971 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Juli wrote: > > TheMuffinMan: > > > "'You're going to pay,' said Malfoy in a voice barely > > louder than a whisper,'I'm going to make you've done > > to my father...' > > > > 'Well, I'm terrified now,' said Harry sarcastically, > > 'I s'pose Lord Voldemort's just a warm up act for you > > three...'" > > > > The way Harry gloats in front of Draco, He tries to > > make it seem like HE fought Voldie, when really when > > faced with the dark lord he froze up and had to be > > saved by Dumbledore! I've always hated the fact that > > Harry said this, I'm not sure why, but I've kind of > > lost a little respect in Harry after this. SO what's > > everyone's opinion in this?? > > > Juli: > Sorry to answer this post soooo late, but an idea just > came to my mind, what if Harry was just trying to make > Draco angrier? "Yeah, I sent your dad to Azkaban and > I'm not sorry for it, you think you can hurt me? If > Voldemort couldn't, how will you?" If someone who I > hate tells me "I'm not afraid of you, not even a bit", > it would make me much angrier, so I believe that's > Harry's motive, to make Draco curse him so he can do > it back without looking so guilty. imamommy: Just imagine: You've been through a living hell, survived it, and then some punk who used to call you four-eyes in junior high shows up to say, in essence, "Nyah, nyah, can't catch me! (blows raspberries)" I have always taken this as a sign that Harry has truly outgrown Draco as a rival. He's been gritting his teeth and putting up with him for a while, but this is the point where Harry kind of says, "Frankly my dear, I don't give a d**n!! Also, Harry fought LV in Goblet of Fire, and I think this is the first time Draco's called him out since. So it's not like he hasn't done anything at all to Voldemort. imamommy From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com Tue Nov 16 11:12:12 2004 From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (Barry Arrowsmith) Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2004 11:12:12 +0000 Subject: The Second Prophecy Message-ID: <5D534028-37C0-11D9-9024-000A9577CB94@btconnect.com> No: HPFGUIDX 117972 It's a neat twist that it's only after we've heard the second prophecy that we learn that there was a first - even then it's another couple of books before we find out how significant the first was in the life and times of H. Potter Esq. I think there is another twist too: look at the second one we see (in OoP), it's delphic, obscurely couched, so much so that we're none too certain of it's full meaning. By comparison the second (the first we hear) seems as clear as crystal; it's so obvious, especially given the action that surrounds it. But what if it's not as obvious as it looks; what if it's constructed in the same the-interpretation-is-up-to-you mode as the first? Traditionally, Seers are supposed to be opaque; no oracle worth their salt would dream of making clear and unambiguous predictions; it's against all the tenets of the Affiliated Prophets, Soothsayers and Prognosticators Cabbalistic Co-operative (Working Practices Sub-Committee). Deary me, no. Can't make it easy for Joe Public, they're supposed to have to think about it, be misled and maybe get it right at the last minute. Now there'll be those sighing at this point. "Oh, God; he's at it again," they'll say. Yep. True. It's what Kneasy is for. I'm well aware that nothing I can say will ever sway this group, those who like things cut and dried, so they may as well click on to the next post now. But for those with an interest in intrigue, plotting and possible JKR sneakiness, bear with me. One thing worth noticing is how the entire passage where Harry relates Sybill's burblings to DD is constructed. He reports the prophecy, carefully putting no name to "the servant of Voldemort". Then immediately he starts on about saving Peter's life and that it'll be his fault if Voldy comes back. (Harry believes the prophecy is about Peter.) DD is more laid back about the whole thing and goes so far as to state - "...predicting the future is a very difficult business indeed.... Professor Trelawney, bless her, is living proof of that." The way it's all presented on the page, almost without pause eliding from the servant of Voldy in the prophecy to saving Pettigrews life (not necessarily the same thing at all) could be a very nice piece of mis-direction, well worthy of an admitted fan of Agatha Christie. DD gives a sort of gloss to the whole episode, an "it'll all come out in the wash" pragmatism. Hmm. MAGIC DISHWASHER, I shouldn't wonder. He does give some credence to Harry's concerns, even though earlier he has stated that Sirius has not acted like an innocent man. There's no doubt that Sirius has gained the sympathy of a lot of the readers simply by dying. Understandable, I suppose, don't kick a man when he's down, that sort of thing. Though why not, if he deserves a kicking? He's much nearer your boots for a start. Browse through the back posts (pre-OoP) and more fans were critical, if not downright suspicious. As an example of the sort of thing I'm on about, read Pip's "The Spying Game and the Shrieking Shack" - post 39662, which covers the whole SS fiasco in great detail, considers a PossiblyEvil!Black; that *both* of them could be Voldy agents and notes that although DD gives loads of reasons why Fudge would never believe Black to be innocent, he never even tries to present any of the evidence or to convince him of the fact. A real fighter for truth and justice, our Albus. On to the prophecy itself. "The Dark Lord lies alone and friendless, abandoned by his followers. His servant has been chained these twelve years. Tonight, before midnight, the servant will break free and set out to rejoin his master. the Dark Lord will rise again with his servants aid, greater and more terrible than ever before. Tonight... before midnight.... the servant.... will set out... to rejoin.... his master.... " Right. The first sentence; any problems? Nor with me. The "chained these twelve years" - strictly speaking Peter hasn't been chained at all; he could have slipped away from the Burrow or Hogwarts any time he liked. Unless there's been something going on we don't know about, he's been in a sort of voluntary exile, in hiding. (Though I might have an idea about that - watch this space. Contradictory? You bet. But for the moment I'm arguing a different case.) Sirius on the other hand, except for some months of going back to Nature, being at one with the birds, bees and Acromantula, has been banged up in Azkaban, slopping out every morning and giving a very good impression of being chained. "Break free before midnight" Well, Peter fits that - and so does Sirius. DD gives Hermione the Timeturner at five minutes to midnight, then locks the hospital wing door. They get back at exactly that time, after helping Sirius to escape ten minutes previously. How interesting! Harry and Hermione strain every sinew to get Sirius out of there just before the prophecy deadline. Peter on the other hand wanders off into the shrubbery well before midnight and without any reference being made to the timing of his escape. "Set out to rejoin his master" Fine. No problem. Peter yes, Sirius - where did he go when he escaped? Any idea? I wouldn't trust that exotic bird too much, especially as it was supposedly to mislead the Aurors. But set out - that needn't mean 'join immediately' - a journey of a thousand miles (or a thousand days) starts with a single step - the setting out. "...with his servants aid will rise again greater and more terrible than before." Peter - again yes. Sirius - again it's not ruled out. You don't need to be at Voldy's elbow to aid him - witness Barty Crouch Jnr. You can aid the cause in all sorts of ways. Voldy wants the Prophesy globe; how would an agent help there? By claiming sole guardian rights over Harry. By encouraging Harry's rashness. By influencing Harry against Snape's Occlumency. Or by being deliberately ambiguous (or by being deliberately *not* ambiguous) to Kreacher. Or by making sure that you'll be noticed by Malfoy while animaging about Kings Cross against the wishes of everybody with an ounce of sense. Passing a message? "Yes, I'm around; yes I'm close to Harry." Useful stuff for the Voldy clique. I think it was very sensible of DD to ensure that Sirius was alone in G.P. as infrequently as possible, if at all. And just how often was Harry allowed to be alone with Sirius at G.P.? Pippin is absolutely sure Lupin killed Sirius at the Ministry. So am I, but not because Lupin is ESE. Lupin is DD's gofer - just as he was in CoS. It's because Sirius is a danger to Harry and to the Order. DD and therefore Lupin know he's better dead, a fond memory can do no harm, a disruptive influence on Harry very definitely can - a thought I first posted many months ago. Yes, Peter has killed Cedric, aided Voldy with others, but that was after CoS. Whatever he is now, there's only Sirius' word that he was the sole guilty party before CoS. And there's been a spate of posts recently having another close look at Peter. He's no angel, but that in itself does not guarantee an innocent Sirius. See? Both Peter and Sirius can be fitted into the first prophecy. And as a basic rule of thumb - when Jo offers alternatives, go for the one that will surprise Harry and many of the readers. After all, what's the point of a story like HP without the BANGS? Predictability is no fun at all. Kneasy From cat_kind at yahoo.com Tue Nov 16 11:14:35 2004 From: cat_kind at yahoo.com (cat_kind) Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2004 11:14:35 -0000 Subject: JKR's writing in OoP (was Re: Sirius's Future) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117973 > annegirl11: > >> I'm going to make an extreme statement here: Sirius' death was > bad writing. Sirius' story is so ridiculously, over-the-top tragic > that killing him at the pit of his depression is a cop-out. It's > soapy, it's lazy writing, and it's a waste of a complex, > interesting character. catkind now: I'm not entirely disagreeing with you here, but I think Sirius was not at the pit of his depression. He'd been let out of 12GP, he was joining in the fighting, just like he wanted. There is closure there if you want it: "some things are worth dying for" declaims Sirius to the Weasleys (not an exact quote). It's not exactly over-dramatic, either. One moment he's there, the next he's gone, we don't really realise what's happened, especially after the DEs showing such cartoonish incompetence at killing anyone up to this point. As for complex and interesting characters - well, we don't exactly have a shortage do we? (*ducks missiles from Sirius fans*) > annegirl: > The point I'm trying to make is that if JKR had a plan for the > significance of Sirius' death, she didn't pull it off. As a reader, > I was not convinced that Sirius' death impacted Harry in some > positive, life-lesson way. Cedric's death impacted me in a dramatic > way; Sirius' was contrived and obvious. << catkind now: Why do deaths have to be significant or life-lessons? They aren't in Real Life, perhaps that is the point JKR was trying to make? No, Sirius' death doesn't make much sense, and that's exactly why I think it might be well written after all. > Carol: We're, in a VERY basic way, in the same situation we were in at the > end of GoF...LV is back and we have to fight him. Yes? catkind now: Hi Carol. Well, not exactly the same situation: we've come forwards in the sense that the Ministry is now admitting to the problem, and in that Harry has learned to work with people other than Ron and Hermione. I agree that OotP is odd and jumpy and frustrating and plotless. Then so's being fifteen years old. Significant? catkind From theadimail at yahoo.co.in Tue Nov 16 12:00:12 2004 From: theadimail at yahoo.co.in (theadimail) Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2004 12:00:12 -0000 Subject: The Second Prophecy In-Reply-To: <5D534028-37C0-11D9-9024-000A9577CB94@btconnect.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117974 kneasy: The "chained these twelve years" - strictly speaking Peter hasn't been chained at all; he could have slipped away from the Burrow or Hogwarts any time he liked. Unless there's been something going on we don't know about, he's been in a sort of voluntary exile, in hiding. (Though I might have an idea about that - watch this space. Contradictory? You bet. But for the moment I'm arguing a different case.) adi here: Remember the prophecy was delivered by Sybil Trelawney. The conventional thinking at the time was that Sirius was the servant of Voldemort, so when she had the intimation of the future she described the servant in terms refering to Sirius. But it turns out to be that the servant of Voldemort did escape but he was not Sirius. This makes the delivery of prophecies interesting. I think even though they are delivered in a fit of impulse they are also clouded by the seer's present day knowledge. If this premise is true, it could prove to be interesting development in the theory of prophecies that the fandom has so lustily developed. From willsonkmom at msn.com Tue Nov 16 12:08:34 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2004 12:08:34 -0000 Subject: The Nature of Galleons In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117975 "ohnooboe" wrote:> > My point is that magic takes the place of MANY of the things > we, as unfortunate Muggles, are paying for. Electricity, gasoline, > natural gas, etc. It's possible that taxes are paid to the MoM, but > we don't know. Food can be created, travel is easy to come by, and > even shelter can be made. No one has a monopoly on magic. > Commonwealth Spellison and Ameri-charm aren't charging a sickle a > spell (so far as we know...and for all you Brits, that was RIGHT > funny! :) Magic is not a non-renewable resource; it's there in > abundance and for the taking. So many of life's necessities can be > created, or had in some way, through magic. That being the case, why > the drastic economic divides? What are we (or maybe just I) missing > about the nature of money in the WW? Potioncat: I cut and pasted this from Quick Quills using magic, food, money as keywords. I thouht I'd pasted all the important information, but I missed the date and real source. But here is JKR's quote on magic and money. There are probably more: Quoting: "Some webmaster and a boy named Alfie Her favourite Simpsons character is Lisa, she supports Spurs Football Club and she thought your questions helped to make this ''the best interview yet''. Enjoy our (and your) WORLD EXCLUSIVE INTERVIEW WITH JK ROWLING Your webmaster and young Alfie met JK Rowling in the London office of her publishers, Bloomsbury, at 9.15am on July 8 - the publication date of Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire. Because of her hectic schedule, we were allowed only 10-15 minutes with 'Jo' but we didn't waste a single moment - and thanks to your questions, she described the interview as ''the best yet''. So without further ado, here is our long-awaited and much-enjoyed exclusive interview with JKR, in a Q&A format. Q: It seems that the wizards and witches at Hogwarts are able to conjure up many things, such as food for the feasts, chairs and sleeping bags. . .if this is so, why does the wizarding world need money ? What are the limitations on the material objects you can conjure up ? It seems unnecessary that the Weasleys would be in such need of money. . . (Jan Campbell) A: Very good question (well done, Jan!!). 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. I love these logical questions!" End of Quote So I would guess that when McGonagall waved her wand in Snape's office (CoS) she was moving food from the kitchen to the office. And Molly may have done the same thing. Or the sauce from Molly's wand may have really been "empty calories." From willsonkmom at msn.com Tue Nov 16 13:04:14 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2004 13:04:14 -0000 Subject: RW and death was JKR's writing in OoP (was Re: Sirius's Future) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117976 > > catkind now: Why do deaths have to be significant or life-lessons? > They aren't in Real Life, perhaps that is the point JKR was trying to > make? No, Sirius' death doesn't make much sense, and that's exactly > why I think it might be well written after all. > Potioncat: I agree. And look at this, we all knew someone was going to die. Then we were set up time and time again to expect a death, only to dodge the bullet, so to speak. (Weasley kids, Arthur, Minerva...) All of a sudden, without warning, Sirius is gone. After DD the great savior of the WW shows up. But that's what happens in the RW. I know this isn't JKR's experience, but my kids have come to think of death as something that comes out of nowhere. Look at their experience: 1.) 9/11 a neighbor is killed at the Pentagon during his 2 weeks reserve duty 2.) the following year, in our area, a sniper kills one person after another, at schools, service stations, shopping center parking lots. 3.) several classmates have died in car accidents 4.) several classmates have died from suicide. It is one heck of a grim world out there for teenagers! From red_rider4 at lycos.com Tue Nov 16 13:18:45 2004 From: red_rider4 at lycos.com (Hester Griffith) Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2004 13:18:45 -0000 Subject: Founders as Wizarding Government In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117977 Subject: Re: Founders as Wizarding Government Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2004 01:17:50 -0000 > > > In addition, we have never heard anyone talk about paying > tuition at Hogwarts, > > Hester: Yes, we have. Harry discusses it briefly with Hagrid when he > first learns about Hogwarts > > So do they have to pay tuition? > > Andrew SS pg. 63: "I haven't got any money - and you heard Uncle Vernon last night... he won't pay for me to go and learn magic." SS pg. 75: Hagrid helped Harry pile some of it into a bag. "...Right, that should be enough fer a couple o' terms, we'll keep the rest safe for yeh." I always read this as meaning Harry took enough to pay tuition, buy books for a few years, and have extra spending money. I think I remember the Weasleys withdrawing more for Harry in one of the later books, but I can't remember which. Maybe book 4 when Mrs. Weasley picks up all the school supplies while everyone else is at the QWC. Hester From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com Tue Nov 16 13:29:20 2004 From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (arrowsmithbt) Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2004 13:29:20 -0000 Subject: The Second Prophecy plus a correction In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117978 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "theadimail" wrote: > Remember the prophecy was delivered by Sybil Trelawney. The > conventional thinking at the time was that Sirius was the servant of > Voldemort, so when she had the intimation of the future she described > the servant in terms refering to Sirius. But it turns out to be that > the servant of Voldemort did escape but he was not Sirius. This makes > the delivery of prophecies interesting. I think even though they are > delivered in a fit of impulse they are also clouded by the seer's > present day knowledge. If this premise is true, it could prove to be > interesting development in the theory of prophecies that the fandom > has so lustily developed. Quite so. It do make it fun the way opinion swings back and forth, but the sympathy engendered by the veil incident has generally tilted the balance in Sirius' favour and even more against Peter. I'm just giving it a nudge back the other way. Sybill. Well, she's an out and out fraud as a Divination teacher. Harry and Ron get full marks for homework made up of random guesses none of which come to pass. Is this an indication that her Seer ability might be similarly suspect? That's convoluted, even for JKR. Not impossible, though. *Correction* It's been pointed out to me that when referring to Lupin as DD's gofer and to the possible innocence of Peter before the Shrieking Shack incident, I refer you to CoS. Wrong. Sorry about that. It should of course be PoA. I grovel. Kneasy From R.Vink2 at chello.nl Tue Nov 16 13:36:29 2004 From: R.Vink2 at chello.nl (Renee) Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2004 13:36:29 -0000 Subject: JKR's writing in OoP (was Re: Sirius's Future) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117979 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "cat_kind" wrote: > > > > annegirl: > > The point I'm trying to make is that if JKR had a plan for the > > significance of Sirius' death, she didn't pull it off. As a reader, > > I was not convinced that Sirius' death impacted Harry in some > > positive, life-lesson way. Cedric's death impacted me in a dramatic > > way; Sirius' was contrived and obvious. << > > catkind now: Why do deaths have to be significant or life-lessons? > They aren't in Real Life, perhaps that is the point JKR was trying to > make? No, Sirius' death doesn't make much sense, and that's exactly > why I think it might be well written after all. Renee: I seem to remember JKR saying somewhere that it was necessary for Sirius to die and that we would find out why in the next book. OotP is less of a standalone than the previous books, so it's perhaps a bit premature to say it doesn't make sense. Also, Sirius's death may not be overly dramatic, Harry's reaction to it certainly is, and that's where the significance lies. Renee From drliss at comcast.net Tue Nov 16 14:07:18 2004 From: drliss at comcast.net (drliss at comcast.net) Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2004 14:07:18 +0000 Subject: Sirius's Future/Death Message-ID: <111620041407.23015.419A0995000E53CF000059E722058863609C9C07049D0B@comcast.net> No: HPFGUIDX 117980 > annegirl: > The point I'm trying to make is that if JKR had a plan for the > significance of Sirius' death, she didn't pull it off. As a reader, > I was not convinced that Sirius' death impacted Harry in some > positive, life-lesson way. Cedric's death impacted me in a dramatic > way; Sirius' was contrived and obvious. << catkind now: Why do deaths have to be significant or life-lessons? They aren't in Real Life, perhaps that is the point JKR was trying to make? No, Sirius' death doesn't make much sense, and that's exactly why I think it might be well written after all. Lissa: See, Catkind's point is exactly why I think Sirius's death WAS extremely well written. I've known people who've died too young, and yes. Their lives were not complete, their was a lot more that SHOULD have happened, and it's really frustrating and anger-inducing to watch. I will be -furious- if Sirius comes back, even though he's one of my favorite characters and I ship him with Lupin and feel terrible for my beloved (not-ESE, sorry, couldn't resist) werewolf. I hated Sirius dying and it's totally not fair, but that's what war is, and that's what death can be. I think there were very good reasons Sirius had to die, most of which relate to Harry and not Sirius. One possibility is Harry needs the fresh grief to spur him on. Fighting Voldie isn't going to be easy, and I think it's more believable and doable when Voldie's taken people Harry loves- and can remember!- from him. Harry needs to be pushed to the edge. The other thing I keep seeing is an alienation or removal of the adults. I mean, Harry's parents are dead, Molly's pushing Harry away with her overprotectiveness, Dumbledore distanced himself, Hagrid's involved with the Order and Madame Maxime... and the only thing that could keep Sirius from Harry's side is death. If I'm right about the adult thing being important, Sirius needs to die for some reason relevant to Harry's development. >From about as far from the Nile as you can get.... Lissa [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From navarro198 at hotmail.com Tue Nov 16 15:00:06 2004 From: navarro198 at hotmail.com (scoutmom21113) Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2004 15:00:06 -0000 Subject: The Second Prophecy plus a correction In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117981 theadimail wrote: Remember the prophecy was delivered by Sybil Trelawney. The conventional thinking at the time was that Sirius was the servant of Voldemort, so when she had the intimation of the future she described the servant in terms refering to Sirius. But it turns out to be that the servant of Voldemort did escape but he was not Sirius. This makes the delivery of prophecies interesting. I think even though they are delivered in a fit of impulse they are also clouded by the seer's present day knowledge. If this premise is true, it could prove to be interesting development in the theory of prophecies that the fandom has so lustily developed. Kneasy: Quite so. It do make it fun the way opinion swings back and forth, but the sympathy engendered by the veil incident has generally tilted the balance in Sirius' favour and even more against Peter. I'm just giving it a nudge back the other way. Bookworm: Kneasy's theory has a certain logic by itself. The problem I have with ESE!Sirius and ESE!Lupin theories is James. Was he such a bad judge of character that -two- of his best friends went over to Voldemort? Especially one who was like a brother to him? It is obvious that Peter has now even if there may have been questions about his role as Secret-Keeper. Despite circumstantial evidence, I just don't believe Lupin is evil. Sirius was to James as Ron is to Harry. (I don't believe Ron will turn either.) McGonagall equated them to the twins, who are rarely - if ever- seen alone. Sirius was furious with Peter because Peter gave in to his fear instead of fighting to the death to protect his friends. With that kind of characterization, it just doesn't make sense that Sirius would betray James or Harry. That said, the way Sirius is portrayed encouraging Harry to take risks in OoP is so opposite from his cautiousness in GoF there seems to be a disconnect somewhere. In GoF he was in hiding but was on his own. In OoP he was stuck back in the house he detested with horrible reminders of his family. Is that enough to cause the change? The Weasleys were helping him clean out the rooms. We know he could get his money from Gringotts. After the kids went back to school, he apparently didn't have much to do - why not completely redecorate? Or is it, as a friend has suggested, a "guy thing" to ignore their physical surroundings even if they were driving him crazy? Kneasy: I grovel. Bookworm: Now there's an image to consider ;-) Ravenclaw Bookworm From navarro198 at hotmail.com Tue Nov 16 15:30:51 2004 From: navarro198 at hotmail.com (scoutmom21113) Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2004 15:30:51 -0000 Subject: Harry's moral core vs. Voldie's In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117982 Snow wrote: I personally believe that Tom's mother lived, and may still be living, but was forced to choose between her son and his rejecting father or her wizarding world connection with the last of the pure royalty line of Slytherin. Bookworm: Snow, are you saying that Tom's mother went back to her wizarding family? Then why not take Tom with her - because he was half- blood? Kim here: Ditto to Snow's ideas! I read her post after posting 117924 to Geoff on the same topic. I agree though that it's nice to think of Tom's mother loving her husband and son so much, but there's nothing in canon to say yay or nay to that idea. Bookworm: We do have an indication that she didn't go back to her husband. When the Riddles were killed, the family included the parents and a grown son. Nothing was said about the son's wife escaping or being away at the time. Kim wrote (in post 117924): I agree with you that it's not likely for a birth attendant to know the name Marvolo, but it was still quite possible. Bookworm: It is not unusual for someone to ask an expectant mother what names she has picked out for her child. Mrs. Riddle could have told the birth attendant about the family names. Does a witch know the gender of the child she is carrying? Or did Mrs. Riddle also pick a girl's name that we wouldn't have heard about? Ravenclaw Bookworm From annemehr at yahoo.com Tue Nov 16 15:45:00 2004 From: annemehr at yahoo.com (annemehr) Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2004 15:45:00 -0000 Subject: The Second Prophecy In-Reply-To: <5D534028-37C0-11D9-9024-000A9577CB94@btconnect.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117983 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Barry Arrowsmith wrote: > See? Both Peter and Sirius can be fitted into the first prophecy. > And as a basic rule of thumb - when Jo offers alternatives, go for the > one that will surprise Harry and many of the readers. > After all, what's the point of a story like HP without the BANGS? > Predictability is no fun at all. > > Kneasy Nothing to argue with in your post; even though I'd be surprised if Sirius turned out to have been ESE, it'd only be a mild one. Less of a surprise than if it were Lupin! And I proudly admit to being a paid-up member of the Second-Prophecy-Doesn't-Mean-What-You-Say-It- Does,-Mr.-Dumbledore Society (but then, it is quite a popular club). I'm just wondering if we can add another name to the possibilities for the first prophecy. I mean, Barty Crouch, Jr. Here's something he says in GoF, "Veritaserum": "Tell me about the Quidditch World Cup," said Dumbledore. "Winky talked my father into it," said Crouch, still in the same monotonous voice. "She spent months persuading him[...] But Winky didn't know that I was growing stronger. I was starting to fight my father's Imperius curse. There were times when I was almost myself again. There were brief periods when I seemed outside his control.[...]" So, some months before the Quidditch World Cup in late August, Barty began breaking the "chains" of his father's control. A night in June, perhaps? Admittedly, it would be a honking great coincidence if it began shortly before midnight on the very same day that Peter and Sirius escaped Hogwarts... Reminds me of the crowd of DEs claiming to be the "faithful servant" -- Barty knew he was, as did Bellatrix (who, in the courtroom, claimed the title for Rodolphus, Rabastan and Barty as well), and Wormtail assert that he, too, is a faithful servant. Lots of people vying for the titles of "to cowardly to return" and "left me forever," as well as "killer of Sirius". Jo's left us plenty of rope to hang anybody, including ourselves, with. Just for fun :> can we make another case? How about Hermione then? Nobody really knows how extensive her reading has been. Suppose that in her first time in Diagon Alley, young and impressionable, she bought a used old book, a copy of which both Grindelwald and Riddle had perused many years ago; the harried shopkeeper didn't even notice it in the armload of tomes she was paying for. A seductive book about the joys of powerful magic and its practical uses. But as a Muggleborn, she was for years prevented from putting into practice the evil ideas she absorbed from it. She was young and had a certain amount of native altruism to overcome, for a start. She also had no allies -- none of the Slytherins could see past "mudblood" to the evil genius developing within. For she soon came to embrace her magical side so completely as to revile her Muggle heritage. Why else does one suppose she spends as little time as possible with her parents anymore? Once she'd found out about Wormtail, though, she'd found her opening. Carefully preventing Harry from messing up his escape, she used the time turner for a second time that night, all alone, and stationed herself in the path she knew the fleeing rat would take. She persuaded Wormtail to take a message to his master detailing what she'd learned from the old book and how she could be of help. In OoP she got to work. She kept Harry's temper raw by picking fights with Ron all the time. She got him into trouble with Umbridge by insisting on raising her hand in class the first week, knowing Harry would never be able to keep his mouth shut. She sabotaged his date with Cho and Evanesced the rest of his potion after Snape dropped Harry's flask, thus keeping his emotions on the surface to interfere with Occlumency lessons. She disentangled Harry from Umbridge's office so he could "save" Sirius when she could just as well left him there relatively safe (a bit of Crucio being much preferable to someone getting lured to the MoM and killed, after all). She positively goaded him into going to the MoM with that "saving people thing" remark. And it was all made possible the night she sent her note to Voldemort with Wormtail. Oh, and how does she fit with that little phrase from the prophecy, "the servant will set out to rejoin his master"? Ah. Well, either Hermione is indeed ESE but not the servant of the prophecy, or she's Voldemort's offspring, conceived in the hope of opposing a son to the prophesy boy, but rejected for being female, who wound up with a pair of dentists eager to take in a foundling as they could have no children of their own. Yeah, that's it. And Voldemort is glad to have her now, because spending twelve years as a vapor can readjust one's priorities a bit. ESE!Annemehr From annemehr at yahoo.com Tue Nov 16 16:02:22 2004 From: annemehr at yahoo.com (annemehr) Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2004 16:02:22 -0000 Subject: The Second Prophecy plus a correction In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117984 > Bookworm: > Kneasy's theory has a certain logic by itself. The problem I > have with ESE!Sirius and ESE!Lupin theories is James. Was he such a > bad judge of character that -two- of his best friends went over to > Voldemort? Annemehr: All of his friends! All three of them! Well, maybe not. :) The ESE theories can stand alone, so really, any combination of them can be true, as long as it includes ESE!Peter (now there's a challenge: come up with an Innocent!Peter theory!). But going by "Snapes Worst Memory," I could readily believe that James was not so good at choosing friends when he was young and arrogant. I'm sure Lily's good; she's probably the one who deflated his head, but he never broke with his friends, evil or not. Bookworm: > That said, the way Sirius is portrayed encouraging Harry to take > risks in OoP is so opposite from his cautiousness in GoF there seems > to be a disconnect somewhere. Annemehr: I keep coming back to Kreacher. I notice that during the Christmas holiday, between the kids' arrival (when Sirius told Kreacher "Out!") and Kreacher's reappearance, Sirius was much more cheerful. There was a noticeable relapse in his mood just before term started again, after Kreacher's return. Again, the time Harry used Umbridge's fire to talk to Lupin and Sirius about Snape's memory in the pensieve, Kreacher was also missing ("hiding in the attic again"), and Sirius was again in a good humor. Now that Sirius is dead, it's all beside the point for him. Yet, I'll be watching out in the future for Kreacher. It's the old "poisoning Sirius" theory that was out months ago, of course. I still think it likely that Kreacher found something evil in that evil house that he kept dosing Sirius with, whenever he was there. Funny, it was Dumbledore who made sure *Sirius* was always there, locked up with Kreacher, so he may have been more responsible for Sirius' death than he knows. This is all assuming Sirius was not evil, of course! ;) Annemehr From kelly at protocallonline.com Tue Nov 16 16:02:41 2004 From: kelly at protocallonline.com (kellymcj2000) Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2004 16:02:41 -0000 Subject: OoP: Neville's Wand In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117985 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "theshef2002" wrote: > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Professor Granger > wrote: > In > hindsight, I thought that it was very appropriate that it was Harry > and Neville battling the Death Eaters while everyone else was > injured, instead of it being between the Death Eaters, Harry, Ron, > and Hermione (no offense to those two characters). kmc I do agree it was appropriate Neville was there and I also wonder if this is foreshadowing the final confrontation. Perhaps Neville will be the last to fall before Harry takes on LV one on one. Perhaps instead it foreshadows Neville as the next leader of this generation after Harry snuffs it. I do think Harry will indeed emerge, even more than he has, as a leader for many wizards about his age both in and out of Hogwarts. shef queried > So now what? Do you think Hermione will start to play less of a role > now as well? Ron was practically non-existent in ths book, he's > become more of a "supporting character" He had about as much page > time as Ginny, Neville, the twins, and Luna (Luna! of all people!). > > With Neville becoming more and more prominent, will the Trio fall > apart? Or will Ron be replaced? > > Shef It could very well be the beginning of less page space for the trio. Many people have speculated the trio will begin to fall apart owing to Harry's burden of knowledge and possible withdrawal from people. I do not think the trio will completely disband, though certainly the relationships within it will change. I suspect that from a literary pov it was necessary to downplay some well established characters, such as Ron, in order to have enough space to introduce and develop other characters. Also, Harry's personal struggles obviously needed more room. And back to Professor Granger's comments, I wonder if the entire sequence of how and when the others of 'the six' either fall or are injured is foreshadowed in the MOM scenes. kmc kmc From hautbois1 at comcast.net Tue Nov 16 16:08:14 2004 From: hautbois1 at comcast.net (ohnooboe) Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2004 16:08:14 -0000 Subject: The Nature of Galleons In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117986 potioncat harkened unto me: > > Q: It seems that the wizards and witches at Hogwarts are able to > conjure up many things, such as food for the feasts, chairs and > sleeping bags. . .if this is so, why does the wizarding world need > money ? What are the limitations on the material objects you can > conjure up ? It seems unnecessary that the Weasleys would be in such > need of money. . . (Jan Campbell) > A: Very good question (well done, Jan!!). 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. I love these logical questions!" Excellent! Thanks! Though, then does the food vanish from your stomach after you eat it? How unsatisfying! Patrick...who also loves these logical questions...mostly when they have answers. From foxmoth at qnet.com Tue Nov 16 16:15:55 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2004 16:15:55 -0000 Subject: Sex, Lies and the Potterverse Re: Lupin, (him only, really) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117987 > > > Pippin: > > > If Remus is also called Wormtail, then JKR has not lied, she's hidden behind a double meaning. She is, after all, the person who had Dobby explain that telling Harry the diary plot didn't have anything to do with "He Who Must Not Be Named" was supposed to be a clue. <<< > > Erin: > It's a good thing you're not a politician, Pippin! The world would be in some serious trouble if you were arguing the meaning of the word "sex", what exactly was meant by a "lie", and who "Wormtail" really was. < Pippin: Equivocation has a more honorable (and Potter-related) history than you might guess.Catholics in England and Scotland during the late sixteenth century were instructed in ways to evade interrogation without, in the church's view, violating the prohibition against lying. "A Treatise on Equivocation" was found among the papers of Henry Garnet, one of Guy Fawkes' fellow conspirators in the Gunpowder Plot. The treatise allowed several ways to give misleading answers including ambiguity ("a priest lyeth not in my house"), incompleteness ( "I went to see him for dinner" omitting that you had attended mass afterwards), and hidden gestures and pronoun references("He went that way" while pointing the other way with your finger in your pocket.) The most controversial recommendation of the treatise was that one could give an answer with "a secret meaning" that went against the common meaning. It instructed that a priest who was asked the question, "Is your name Peter?" could answer "No" with the mental reservation, "so as I am bound to utter it to you, since you have no lawful jurisdiction over me." information from http://www.nationalreview.com/kopel/kopel110501.shtml I don't think JKR is going that far, but it is interesting that the example used is Peter. We have examples of Dumbledore using the first two means of equivocation as he answers Fudge in OOP. Modern ethicists don't see anything wrong with the butler saying that the master is not at home, because everyone understands that this is a polite evasion. Most of us understand that the questions we have no business asking are not going to get a full or truthful response -- in fact readers have posted about taking this into consideration when deciding which poll question to vote for at jkrowling.com. JKR is not under oath, has admitted that she doesn't want to give full and frank answers, and has openly said that she tricks her readers. She has fairly warned us of the tricks she is likely to use, and has no less than Albus "epitome of goodness" Dumbledore, whose conspiracy is named The Order of the Phoenix, use such means to deceive his interrogators. I consider I am under no more obligation to consider her answers full and frank than I am to believe that the forward to Fantastic Beasts and Where To Find Them was actually written by Albus Dumbledore. Pippin (not lying about the topic of this message as Erin did mention sex in her post) From ohneill_2001 at yahoo.com Tue Nov 16 16:16:32 2004 From: ohneill_2001 at yahoo.com (ohneill_2001) Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2004 16:16:32 -0000 Subject: CHAPTER DISCUSSION: Chapter 31, O.W.L.s In-Reply-To: <20041115183942.21503.qmail@web53109.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117988 Juli wrote: > But then how could someone get 12 OWLs? I'm talking > about Barty Crouch Jr and Bill Weasley, they both got > 12 OWLs, and we know you can't have so many classes, > even Hermione couldn't handle more than 8 classes in > PoA, so how could anyone take 12? > Now Cory: I'm not sure about this (and I'm travelling and don't have access to my books right now), but I always assumed it was possible to take the OWL exams for courses that you had taken in prior years but might not be taking as a fifth year. Thus, a student might have taken, say, Divination as a 3rd & 4th year and not as a 5th year, but might still receive an OWL for it if they were able to pass the exam as a fifth year. By mixing courses like that over the first five years, a student might be able to get 12. --Cory From hautbois1 at comcast.net Tue Nov 16 16:19:06 2004 From: hautbois1 at comcast.net (ohnooboe) Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2004 16:19:06 -0000 Subject: Does Snape really like Draco? In-Reply-To: <20041116042226.58935.qmail@web53101.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117989 > Kristen writes: > Hi I'm new to this, but Pippin's suggestion got me > thinking about the relationship between Snape and > Draco; and I'm left wondering. Is Snape favoring > Draco is an act? Or does he really like Draco. > (Sorry if this is a duplicate thread). I've had 2 thoughts on this. Perhaps Snape sees himself in Draco and is attempting to push him in the "right" direction (Kelsey said something similar) OR, maybe Snape is using Draco as a means to an end. Get on Draco's good side and you're on Lucius's good side. If you're on Lucius's good side, you're on the good side of everyone whose hand is in Lucius's pocket. Just a thought Patrick From kelly at protocallonline.com Tue Nov 16 16:20:54 2004 From: kelly at protocallonline.com (kellymcj2000) Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2004 16:20:54 -0000 Subject: =?iso-8859-1?q?Re:_JKR=92s_giant_mistake=3F_/_"Voldemort,"_not_"Voldy"?= In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117990 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "ginnysthe1" wrote: > > Kim here (after a break of a few days)... Thought I'd toss out this > joke, FWIW: > > Stacey wrote: > >Also, if I remember correctly JKR herself has stated that Voldemort > should be referred to as Voldemort (not Voldie etc.) in fan > discussions, as it is disrespectful to refer to him otherwise...< > > Katya replied: > >On jkrowling.com under rumors, I found the following: > > "Erm... I was joking. I thought it was very amusing when I found a > chatroom full of people calling him 'Voldy'..." > > Now Kim sings (off key -- aren't you glad this is in an email?): > > What's it all about, Voldie? > Is it just for the moment we live? > What's it all about, when you sort it out, Voldie? > Are we meant to take more than we give, > Or are we meant to be kind? > > And if only fools are kind, Voldie, > Then I guess it is wise to be cruel. > And if life belongs only to the strong, Voldie, > What will you lend on an old Golden Rule? > > As sure as I believe there's a heaven above, Voldie, > I know there's something much more, > Something even Lords of Evil can believe in... > > I believe in love, Voldie. > Without true love, you just exist, Voldie! > Until you find the love you've missed, > You're NOTHING, Voldie! > When you walk, let your heart lead the way, > And you'll find love any day, Voldie, Voldie, Voldie. > > See why it's such a good nickname? ;-) > > Kim I do like it and use it often. I prefer Moldywarts which is so very disrespectful and downright insulting all in one. Mold and warts, unpleasant on their own, disgusting together. Makes me think of what he might have looked like at the beginning of GoF. kmc From spotthedungbeetle at hotmail.com Tue Nov 16 16:26:10 2004 From: spotthedungbeetle at hotmail.com (dungrollin) Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2004 16:26:10 -0000 Subject: The Second Prophecy In-Reply-To: <5D534028-37C0-11D9-9024-000A9577CB94@btconnect.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117991 Kneasy wrote: "...with his servants aid will rise again greater and more terrible than before." Peter - again yes. Sirius - again it's not ruled out. You don't need to be at Voldy's elbow to aid him - witness Barty Crouch Jnr. You can aid the cause in all sorts of ways. Voldy wants the Prophesy globe; how would an agent help there? By claiming sole guardian rights over Harry. By encouraging Harry's rashness. By influencing Harry against Snape's Occlumency. Or by being deliberately ambiguous (or by being deliberately *not* ambiguous) to Kreacher. Or by making sure that you'll be noticed by Malfoy while animaging about Kings Cross against the wishes of everybody with an ounce of sense. Passing a message? "Yes, I'm around; yes I'm close to Harry." Useful stuff for the Voldy clique. Dungrollin: But that didn't help Voldy to rise again, did it? That was afterwards. In order to make that bit of the prophecy apply to Sirius, you need to postulate how he could have been useful to Voldy before the end of GoF. What did Voldy need to rise again? The information from Bertha Jorkins about the TWT and the stuff behind the memory charm about Crouch The Younger being alive, some help from Wormtail and Nagini... What else could Sirius have done to qualify? Dungrollin (Watching the space...) From kelly at protocallonline.com Tue Nov 16 16:34:43 2004 From: kelly at protocallonline.com (kellymcj2000) Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2004 16:34:43 -0000 Subject: Does Snape really like Draco? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117992 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "ohnooboe" wrote: > > > > Kristen writes: > > Hi I'm new to this, but Pippin's suggestion got me > > thinking about the relationship between Snape and > > Draco; and I'm left wondering. Is Snape favoring > > Draco is an act? Or does he really like Draco. > > (Sorry if this is a duplicate thread). > > > I've had 2 thoughts on this. Perhaps Snape sees himself in Draco and > is attempting to push him in the "right" direction (Kelsey said > something similar) OR, maybe Snape is using Draco as a means to an > end. Get on Draco's good side and you're on Lucius's good side. If > you're on Lucius's good side, you're on the good side of everyone > whose hand is in Lucius's pocket. > > Just a thought > > Patrick Yes I agree he's using him to get to Lucius. Also, I think Snape both approves of and despises Draco. Approves because Draco has such a perfect Slytherin attitude toward the Gryffindors. Despises because he's just like Lucius who didn't have the guts to be a good DE and get thrown into Azkaban. kmc From hautbois1 at comcast.net Tue Nov 16 16:40:19 2004 From: hautbois1 at comcast.net (ohnooboe) Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2004 16:40:19 -0000 Subject: The Second Prophecy In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117993 First of all, Kneasy, I'm gonna jump on this train with you. I'm with you, I agree, I admit it... Ok, that said. I'm jumping off track for a moment to comment on... > adi said: > Remember the prophecy was delivered by Sybil Trelawney. The > conventional thinking at the time was that Sirius was the servant of Voldemort, so when she had the intimation of the future she described the servant in terms refering to Sirius...a-snip!...I think even though they are delivered in a fit of impulse they are also clouded by the seer's present day knowledge. Just because we can plainly see SPT is a fraud in class, we shouldn't think that her "genuine" prophesies are frauds (not saying you are, just sticking this in here...) These are done, like you said, in a fit of impulse. She doesn't realize she did it, she probably wouldn't know them if you played it for her. Given that, I don't know that the prophesies have the opportunity to be clouded by the Seer's own knowledge. She doesn't know she gave the proph, why should she be able to cloud the message. This goes back to the nature of prophesies. How? Why? Etc. My own thought is that something is speaking through her. She's just a big witch conduit for whatever is speaking through her. (Any of you who have read Mary Stewart's Merlin Trilogy know what I'm talking about.) Maybe I'm making excuses because I really like the ol' gal and think she trys so hard to BE a Seer that she covers up what Seer-iness she actually has. Patrick (who apologizes in advance to the list elves for my flagrant violation of many list laws...) From willsonkmom at msn.com Tue Nov 16 16:43:20 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2004 16:43:20 -0000 Subject: Who knows Indeed? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117994 Questions, on top of questions. Equivocations. Conspiracy theories to make the mind spin! They can't all be true (not at the same time, anyway) but the authors make very good arguemnts. And now all the old and a few new questions are bouncing around in my head. Who taught Tom Riddle to AK? Who taught Tom Riddle to be a Legilimens? Did Tom form the Death Eaters or did he rise in their ranks? Who knows a great deal about immortality? Who knows the stone was destroyed? But, does anyone else know, I mean really know? Who said, "Severus Snape is no more a Death Eater than I am?" Was he telling the truth and which truth was it? Who knows what to believe? Potioncat who was far more trusting before she began hanging around with Carolyn, Kneasy and Pippin. From navarro198 at hotmail.com Tue Nov 16 16:48:38 2004 From: navarro198 at hotmail.com (scoutmom21113) Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2004 16:48:38 -0000 Subject: The Second Prophecy plus a correction In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117995 Bookworm: Kneasy's theory has a certain logic by itself. The problem I have with ESE!Sirius and ESE!Lupin theories is James. Was he such a bad judge of character that -two- of his best friends went over to Voldemort? Annemehr: All of his friends! All three of them! Well, maybe not. :) The ESE theories can stand alone, so really, any combination of them can be true, as long as it includes ESE!Peter (now there's a challenge: come up with an Innocent!Peter theory!). Bookworm: I was counting either Sirius or Lupin plus Peter. As I said up- thread, Peter is definitely guilty now, even if he was the fall guy as Secret-Keeper. I don't think that, but some do. I really don't see JKR making all of James' friends evil. Especially if you are right that Hermione is. The message to the reader then is that nobody can be trusted. Annemehr: But going by "Snapes Worst Memory," I could readily believe that James was not so good at choosing friends when he was young and arrogant. I'm sure Lily's good; she's probably the one who deflated his head, but he never broke with his friends, evil or not. Bookworm: In the Three Broomsticks, McGonagall described James and Sirius as a pair of troublemakers. It also sounds like James was the leader of their group, so others might have shown bad judgment in following him, not the other way around. We were told that James despised the Dark Arts. He is also the one whose friendship prompted Sirius into rejecting his family's dark attitude. Some people have argued that the Pensieve scene shows them as evil. I think there is more to that scene than what we have seen so far and am withholding judgment until we get that info. According to Sirius, it was Lily who calmed some of James' wilder tendencies, so I agree with your comment about her. Annemehr: I keep coming back to Kreacher. I notice that during the Christmas holiday, between the kids' arrival (when Sirius told Kreacher "Out!") and Kreacher's reappearance, Sirius was much more cheerful. There was a noticeable relapse in his mood just before term started again, after Kreacher's return. Again, the time Harry used Umbridge's fire to talk to Lupin and Sirius about Snape's memory in the pensieve, Kreacher was also missing ("hiding in the attic again"), and Sirius was again in a good humor. Bookworm: I agree the idea has a lot going for it. That along with his knowledge of the Order is what makes his post-OoP activities interesting. It may have been suggested before, but think of the possibilities if Kreacher and Winky join forces in their hatred for Harry. Just what powers do house-elves have that wizards don't? Ravenclaw Bookworm From foxmoth at qnet.com Tue Nov 16 16:56:48 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2004 16:56:48 -0000 Subject: Sirius's Future In-Reply-To: <20041114.223746.432.10.annegirl11@juno.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117996 Annegirl: > I'm going to make an extreme statement here: Sirius' death was bad > writing. Because: > > 1. Sirius' story is so ridiculously, over-the-top tragic that killing himat the pit of his depression -- rather than working with the problems in the character -- is a cop-out. It's soapy, it's lazy writing, and it's a waste of a complex, interesting character. > > 2. Sirius' character arc wasn't finished. When Sirius was young, he was a brilliant wizard, an important order member, devoted friend, and, if you will, imperfect boyfriend. As a man, post-Azkaban, he's emotionally immature and depressed. And then he dies. His character arc was cut off in mid-swing. Sirius was presented as a troubled character, except his troubles were never resolved. (Note: resolution doesn't mean fixing the > problems; but it also doesn't mean sticking him in stasis in his familyhome and never letting him grow beyond who he was when we first met him.)< Pippin: The last time we see Sirius is when Harry interviews him about what he saw in the Pensieve. He looks "concerned" not dishevelled or unhappy. He's not depressed, and he gets no more than justly angry over the end of the occlumency lessons. He didn't die because he was lonely and depressed, he died because some things are worth dying for. It's Harry who's stuck in the past, thinking that Sirius remained mentally in the same place from the end of the Christmas holidays until he went to the MoM, though the text indicates otherwise. It's true, we didn't get to *see* Sirius grow, but it's Harry's story, not his. Annegirl: >Harry showed no growth whatsoever. (Even his one triumph, the DA, was overshadowed by Hermione.) < Pippin: I disagree that Harry showed no growth -- he learned to relate to people besides Ron and Hermione, he learned that he had a talent for teaching, and he learned that his father and his friends weren't exactly saints. He learned that the wonderful power he inherited has the potential to be misused by 'nice' people, not just bullies like Draco or cowards like Peter. Why do you say the DA was overshadowed by Hermione? Yes, it was her idea, but people didn't come because of her. They came because of Harry, and they stayed because of Harry. Annegirl: > 4. The writing in Foot, particularly towards the end, is not JKR's best. It's just not good. How many of you were confused with the whole MM scene? I know I was, and others have agreed with me.< Pippin: Funny thing, but so far whenever JKR has indulged in what seemed to me a noticeably awkward piece of writing, it has always turned out to be deliberate -- flourishing the cloak of pulp in order to hide a clue. For example, it's awkward that Scabbers falls asleep immediately after being tossed away by Goyle in PS/SS -- but it's a clue: Scabbers is a "sleeper" enemy agent. The narrative voice in PS/SS switches from Harry's PoV to Hermione's as Harry struggles with the broom in order to hide the fact that the curse was lifted when Hermione collided with Quirrell, not when she set Snape on fire. Ginny's tears at the end of CoS went on so long that I thought Rowling had overdone it and made it sound fake -- then I had a sneaking suspicion that maybe it was fake, and Ginny, like many a cunning literary lass, had taken refuge in her tears. Seems I might have been right about that, after OOP. The one time when we *know* Rowling made a mistake, the mistaken wand order version, it's actually more beautiful and moving, in many people's opinion, than the "right" version. IMO, Rowling writes badly she does it on purpose, to hide what she's up to. Pippin From jhnbwmn at hotmail.com Tue Nov 16 17:24:38 2004 From: jhnbwmn at hotmail.com (johnbowman19) Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2004 17:24:38 -0000 Subject: DD admits he is an Animagus Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117997 I was recently rereading one of my favorite chapters in OOTP which is titled "The Centaur and the Sneak" and I got to the scene where DD takes on Fudge, Umbridge, Kingsley, and Drawlish. Right before DD takes them all out (in less then a few seconds I might add, He is the Man) he refers to the snag in Fudge's plan, meaning that he will not come quietly. He says " I have absolutely no intention of being sent to Azkaban. I could break out of course-- but what a waste of time, and frankly, I can think of a whole host of things I would rather be doing". Since I have always wondered just how powerful DD it got me thinking on the possible ways one could go about breaking out of Azkaban. We are presented with two possible ways in which one can do this. You can escape like the group of five DEs did, which is probably because the Dementors have let them escape on Voldemort's orders or He could go about the only other way we are presented with: escaping like Sirius did. The only reason Sirius was able to escape is that he was an Animagus. Dementors cannot sense the emotion of animals as well as they can sense the emotions of a human. He could tranform into dog form whenever he needed a break from the constant soul sucking, and eventually he found the determination to slip through the bars after he was skinney enough. The Animagus form is the soul reason why Sirius could escape Azkaban. So from our evidence the only way DD would be able to eascape the gaurds and Azkaban is if he was an Animagus. Plus if you add in the factor that Sirius told DD how he was able to escape Azkaban, it would give DD the knowledge (if he already didn't know) to escape Azkaban at anytime. This would only hold up however, if there is no other way to escape a Dementor without a wand. In closing, by saying he already knows how to escape Azkaban, DD has told us he is either an Animagus or a metamoramagus. Let me know what you think, John From nkafkafi at yahoo.com Tue Nov 16 17:32:44 2004 From: nkafkafi at yahoo.com (nkafkafi) Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2004 17:32:44 -0000 Subject: HP: Mystery or Adventure? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117998 > > Neri: > > So do you think that JKR will also reveal, somewhere in the > next two books, the mystery of what was Snape doing for five > hours while Harry and Co where having their trip to the DoM? < > > Pippin: > > There's no mystery. He was writing the chronicle of the Missing > Twenty-four Hours. > > Neri: > >And if so, in what situation will this mystery be revealed? > > Pippin: > I expect Harry will be, as usual, cornered by the real villain, who > will explain how he has once again managed to delay Snape. By > then, Harry will probably have persuaded himself that Snape > murdered Sirius while hidden in the missing invisibility cloak. > But this time Harry will put two and two together himself, and > force the murderer to confess. Neri again: We already had red-herring!Snape twice, in SS/PS and in GoF. BTW in GoF he was only one suspect out of a bunch, probably because JKR realized he's not much of a red herring anymore. Do you really think the readers will fall for red-herring!Snape a third time? Somehow I doubt it. If the missing 5 hours will be utilized for a mystery plot, I trust JKR will make better use of them than that. And if they won't, well, then maybe not EVERY suspicious occurrence is a basis for a mystery plot. Neri From annemehr at yahoo.com Tue Nov 16 18:15:17 2004 From: annemehr at yahoo.com (annemehr) Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2004 18:15:17 -0000 Subject: The Second Prophecy plus a correction In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 117999 > Annemehr: > All of his friends! All three of them! Well, maybe not. :) The ESE > theories can stand alone, so really, any combination of them can be > true, as long as it includes ESE!Peter (now there's a challenge: come > up with an Innocent!Peter theory!). > > Bookworm: > I was counting either Sirius or Lupin plus Peter. As I said up- > thread, Peter is definitely guilty now, even if he was the fall guy > as Secret-Keeper. I don't think that, but some do. I really > don't see JKR making all of James' friends evil. Especially if you > are right that Hermione is. The message to the reader then is that > nobody can be trusted. Annemehr: Even two of James' three friends turning up evil is quite a lot; may as well be hanged for a sheep as a lamb, and consider all three. If I were betting, though, I'd put my money on Peter alone being evil, but that's merely (IMO) the safest option and not much fun. And by no means certain. I don't *actually* think Hermione is evil (do I?). It's just that, casting my mind over the options while writing that post, I noticed just how much she was *not helping* in OoP. Also, I'm vowing to keep my mind open, really consider all the possibilities, and rule nothing out. After all, I believe that's how Pippin came up with ESE!Lupin in the first place, surprising even herself in the process. Incidentally, though I don't ever remember reading one, I'm sure someone must have posted a theory on Innoncent!Peter in here somewhere... Annemehr From foxmoth at qnet.com Tue Nov 16 18:29:20 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2004 18:29:20 -0000 Subject: HP: Mystery or Adventure? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118000 > > Neri again: > > We already had red-herring!Snape twice, in SS/PS and in GoF. BTW in GoF he was only one suspect out of a bunch, probably because JKR realized he's not much of a red herring anymore. Do you really think the readers will fall for red-herring!Snape a third time? < Pippin: Harry has. Last I heard, he was determined to blame Sirius's death on Snape. Give him some concrete evidence that it's possible, and he'll fall for it, just like he fell for the false vision of the DoM. Sophisticated readers will know better, just as some of us knew to suspect the vision, but so what? The suspense-ridden question will not be whodunnit, but how will Harry react when he finds out? Pippin From s_ings at yahoo.com Tue Nov 16 18:29:43 2004 From: s_ings at yahoo.com (Sheryll Townsend) Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2004 18:29:43 -0000 Subject: Call for Papers: The Witching Hour Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118001 CALL FOR PAPERS: THE WITCHING HOUR Salem, MA October 6-10, 2005 A Harry Potter Symposium presented by HP Education Fanon, Inc. The Witching Hour is an interdisciplinary symposium designed to allow scholars and adult enthusiasts of the Harry Potter series to gather and share research. The conference programming will engage attendees in a broad exploration and understanding of the Harry Potter texts and phenomenon, as well as foster dialogue between academics and fans. The theme of the symposium ? as befits the season, locale and current tone of the series ? is choice, moral ambiguity and the darkness within everyone. While we shall warmly receive submissions dealing with our theme, we wish to stress that we welcome proposals on any and all topics ? whether academic, creative or fan ? relating to Harry Potter, including examinations of writing, art and young adult fantasy literature. Suggested topic tracks include, but are in no way limited to: - Literary: critical issues concerning the novels themselves, as well as the wider arena of children's and young adult literature, including structural analysis, genre considerations, and the response of the academic establishment and publishing industry - Social Sciences: critical responses to the texts through the lenses of anthropology, sociology, psychology, folklore, and so forth - Education: The use and abuse of the novels in the classroom and libraries, censorship controversies and teachers' and librarians' guides - Creative: Examinations of the writing or artistic creative process - Legal: Analyses of legal issues raised by the text of the novels, including wizarding law as set forth therein, and legal controversies relating to the phenomenon or the fan community - Fandom Studies: Studies of the fan response to the novels, including discussions of specific fan activities (e.g., vidding, artwork and fanfiction), and critical examinations of fanfictional tropes - Guides: Examinations of subjects such as the history of the wizarding world, a beginner's guide to the online fandom, and an overview of the numerous Harry Potter "companion" encyclopedias - Film: Critical responses to the Harry Potter films - Music: Studies of the use of music in the Harry Potter books, films and fan culture, such as analyses of the John Williams score or an examination of fans' musical activities In addition to formal papers, The Witching Hour is seeking a variety of presentation models, including pre-organized critical panels, round table-style discussions, and craft-based workshops. Round table discussions will be in-depth explorations of academic, creative or fandom topics led by a presenter. Round table presenters must select a topic for discussion and moderate that discussion at the conference. Workshops are presenter-led, hands-on explorations of methodology and craft, be it writing, art, music or business. We intend that the round tables and workshops, in particular, focus on audience participation and interaction. Finally, our website contains a list of panels for which we are seeking participants. The Witching Hour is also looking for individuals to participate in a variety of fan-based programming. Fanfiction authors are invited to read their work before an audience and participate in a discussion of that work. We also seek a variety of staffers for the booths we are making available for attendees: beta booth, art critique booth, drabble booth and sketch booth. Fanfiction authors should be prepared to attach their work as part of the submissions process. Booth staffers should be prepared to demonstrate their qualifications through a test or inclusion of past work as part of the submissions process. All works used during presentation at The Witching Hour must comply with our NC-17 policy. All submissions, whether for programming, fanfiction reading or booth staffing, must be made electronically via http://www.witchinghour.org by May 15, 2005. Applicants for programming should be prepared to provide a 400-500 word abstract, a 50-100 word summary for program schedules, and a 50-100 word personal biographical note. Fanfiction authors should be prepared to submit the work they wish to read and a 50-100 word personal biographical note. Booth staffers must be prepared to either submit past work or take a test, as appropriate. Presenters and staffers must be registered for the conference by August 1, 2005. Please direct all queries regarding programming to programming at witchinghour.org. Please visit our website, http://www.witchinghour.org, for more information on these elements and the conference itself, as well as an overview of our review process for submissions and biographies of our review board members. To subscribe to our conference newsletter, please e-mail updates at witchinghour.org. HP Education Fanon, Inc. (HPEF) is a 501(c)(3) non-profit organization founded in 2002 to promote and produce educational, Harry Potter-themed symposia on an international scale. HPEF produced its first event, Nimbus ? 2003, in July 2003. More information can be found at http://www.witchinghour.org/who/hpef.html. From ginnysthe1 at yahoo.com Tue Nov 16 18:29:54 2004 From: ginnysthe1 at yahoo.com (ginnysthe1) Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2004 18:29:54 -0000 Subject: Harry's moral core vs. Voldie's In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118002 Snow wrote: >I personally believe that Tom's mother lived, and may still be living, but was forced to choose between her son and his rejecting father or her wizarding world connection with the last of the pure royalty line of Slytherin.< Bookworm replied: >Snow, are you saying that Tom's mother went back to her wizarding family? Then why not take Tom with her - because he was half-blood?< Kim chimes in here: Seems a likely scenario, her rejection of her half-blood baby, if in fact she didn't die but went back to her own snobby, racist family. What a rejection that would have been, one that would have fed the fires of the future Lord Voldemort's wrath. He never really fit into either world and was rejected by both at the tenderest of ages. Clearly too, though LV has claimed a "preference" for pure-bloods, he's also never been averse to torturing or killing pure-bloods (e.g. James Potter, et al.) when they don't follow slavishly along with his schemes. Kim wrote: >Ditto to Snow's ideas! I read her post after posting 117924 to Geoff on the same topic. I agree though that it's nice to think of Tom's mother loving her husband and son so much, but there's nothing in canon to say yay or nay to that idea.< Bookworm responded: >We do have an indication that she didn't go back to her husband. When the Riddles were killed, the family included the parents and a grown son. Nothing was said about the son's wife escaping or being away at the time.< Now Kim responds to Bookworm: I think it's also possible that Mrs. Riddle (the young witch) might have tried to go with her husband to live with the Riddles, and maybe they did take her in at first, but then she died in the interim, so that when teenage Tom Riddle (Voldemort) went to the house in Little Hangleton, she wasn't there with his father and grandparents. And since we still don't know what might have been said between Tom and his father and grandparents before he did them in with AKs, it could be that he killed them *after* they told him his mother too had abandoned him in an attempt to become part of a Muggle family. Nah, it seems like too outlandish a theory, now that I read it through... Of course these theories leave a lot of holes that are hard to fill... If she had gone back with her husband to Little Hangleton, where was he while she was having the baby (that is, if she didn't actually die after giving birth)? Why would the Muggle Riddles accept a witch for a daughter-in-law but then reject the *offspring* of their son and that daughter-in-law? There are way too many holes and no way of knowing what really happened, since canon (the trustworthy part of canon, that is, if you can trust any of the canon...) doesn't say one way or another. Hopefully HBP will remedy the matter. ...It's amazing how much your head can spin when thinking about just one little unexplained aspect of the whole story :-) Kim wrote (in post 117924): >I agree with you [Geoff] that it's not likely for a birth attendant to know the name Marvolo, but it was still quite possible.< Bookworm responded: >It is not unusual for someone to ask an expectant mother what names she has picked out for her child. Mrs. Riddle could have told the birth attendant about the family names. Does a witch know the gender of the child she is carrying? Or did Mrs. Riddle also pick a girl's name that we wouldn't have heard about?< Kim responds: I think I suggested something similar in post 117924 or perhaps in another post in the same thread. Sometimes the threads get a tad mixed up in my mind, so I'm not sure where I said what! Anyway there's no reason (and it doesn't make sense anyway) for Mrs. Riddle to have kept the names for her baby secret, since she (supposedly) died but the names still stuck with baby Tom. So somebody was there to hear what he had been named or to do the naming after his mother died. In any case, your last two questions are worth considering. I too wondered about the possibility of there having been a pre-picked name for a girl just in case. I've also wondered about the origin of the name Marvolo. Sure doesn't sound British. Italian? Spanish? Portuguese? Hmmm... I just did a search in a source that contains lots of names from all over the world, and there wasn't a single Marvolo. Doesn't mean it's not a real name someplace, but it could be a pure creation of JKR. Cheers, Kim (who, as always, hopes her ideas don't duplicate those of previous posters, but if they do, she hopes those posters will chime in with some more) From nkafkafi at yahoo.com Tue Nov 16 18:34:13 2004 From: nkafkafi at yahoo.com (nkafkafi) Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2004 18:34:13 -0000 Subject: The Second Prophecy In-Reply-To: <5D534028-37C0-11D9-9024-000A9577CB94@btconnect.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118003 > Kneasy wrote: > > See? Both Peter and Sirius can be fitted into the first prophecy. > And as a basic rule of thumb - when Jo offers alternatives, go for the > one that will surprise Harry and many of the readers. > After all, what's the point of a story like HP without the BANGS? > Predictability is no fun at all. Neri: I just wanted to help Kneasy a bit with his theory. Some gullible and dull list member might object to this theory on the ground that Sirius can't be Voldemort's servant if he loved James and Harry so much, as JKR mentions in: http://www.jkrowling.com/textonly/faq_view.cfm?id=61 "Sirius's great redeeming quality is how much affection he is capable of feeling. He loved James like a brother and he went on to transfer that attachment to Harry." Of course, the solution to this small problem is obvious: There must be TWO people named Sirius in the HP saga, and JKR was referring to the other Sirius in this quote. Generally speaking, it would be very efficient to assume that there are two characters answering to each name in the WW, and one of them is on the good side while the other is on the dark side. This would enable JKR to say anything to us without (heaven forbid!) lying. Neri From apollovibes at yahoo.com Tue Nov 16 06:11:56 2004 From: apollovibes at yahoo.com (apollovibes) Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2004 06:11:56 -0000 Subject: The Riddles' Murders (WAS: The only one he ever feared? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118004 > > Kim replies: > I see what you're saying, but I was wondering specifically *who* > taught young Tom the Unforgiveable Curses? Not that I really have > any idea myself. Learning AKs, etc. would seem to require more than > looking in a book, even for a gifted student. And at Hogwarts at > least, these curses are pretty much forbidden, aren't they, despite > the fact that Moody!Crouch taught them in GoF? So maybe learning > Unforgiveables was part of an "underground movement" among the bad > students (bad, as in mean and nasty), similar to the way "the > Marauders" had to learn how to become animagi without the knowledge > of their professors. But studying Unforgiveable Curses on one's own > would have to be kept even more hushed up than studying animagus > transfigurations, because of the shear illegality of Unforgiveables. > Maybe TR and friends found outside help in their studies from > unsavory types, whoever they may have been. Something to ponder > anyway! > Assuming the Moody!Crouch was telling the truth - Riddle would have learned about them in his 6th year (depending on how powerful Grindelwald [sp?] was and with WW2 it wouldn't surprise me if they were taught about how to react to such encounters - much like Harry and Co. did). On top of that as well as the amount of Riddle possessed and his large amount of research (figuring out his ancestry, diary, etc), he was quite ahead of the rest of his class, even Dumbledore says so. And if they weren't taught anything about them, I'm sure Riddle would have come across it somewhere. From eggplant9998 at yahoo.com Tue Nov 16 07:30:38 2004 From: eggplant9998 at yahoo.com (eggplant9998) Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2004 07:30:38 -0000 Subject: Harry taking credit for wht he didnt do... In-Reply-To: <20041115190552.41397.qmail@web53109.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118005 TheMuffinMan: > The way Harry gloats in front of Draco, > He tries to make it seem like HE fought > Voldie, when really when > faced with > the dark lord he froze up and had to be > saved by Dumbledore! Harry encountered Voldemort on 4 other occasions and defeated him 4 times; and even in book 5 he showed the dark Lord how strong he was. In the past Voldemort possessed Ginny and even a Defense Against The Dark Arts professor for many months, but he could only do it for a few seconds to Harry. He also demonstrated extraordinary bravery. > I've kind of lost a little respect > in Harry after this. Why? Harry said Malfoy wasn't very intimidating compared to Voldemort and that is perfectly true, then he insulted Malfoy and few people on the planet deserve to be insulted more that that little twerp Malfoy. Eggplant From bob.oliver at cox.net Tue Nov 16 12:23:47 2004 From: bob.oliver at cox.net (lupinlore) Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2004 12:23:47 -0000 Subject: JKR's writing in OoP (was Re: Sirius's Future) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118006 I'm going to have to split the difference on this one. --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "cat_kind" wrote: > Why do deaths have to be significant or life-lessons? > They aren't in Real Life, perhaps that is the point JKR was trying to > make? No, Sirius' death doesn't make much sense, and that's exactly > why I think it might be well written after all. I think this is true. Death, particularly in war, often is sudden, random, and SEEMINGLY pointless (although remember that JKR has said there was a reason for Sirius death). > I agree that OotP is odd and jumpy and frustrating and plotless. Then > so's being fifteen years old. Significant? Actually, no, I don't think it's significant, or if JKR meant it to be she did a terrible job of pulling it off. I'm going to have to side with the legions of OOTP detractors and say most of the faults you mention aren't some extended metaphor for being 15 but really are a sign of laziness, poor planning, shallow thinking, and generally very poor writing on JKR's part, an extraordinarily ill-conceived and badly executed project considering her splendid work in the previous four books. Even worse, I suspect it is a symptom of burn out on her part. After all, she first began the "brain work" on Harry Potter back in 1989, and after fifteen years of dealing with these characters, I think she is growing tired of them. Hopefully she will rest, reflect, and learn from her mistakes next time (although frankly the title "Half-Blood Prince" doesn't give me a great deal of confidence, as it sounds like a bad fanfic). Lupinlore From Vivamus at TaprootTech.com Tue Nov 16 16:09:29 2004 From: Vivamus at TaprootTech.com (Vivamus) Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2004 11:09:29 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: The Second Prophecy In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200411161110588.SM01064@DEVBOX> No: HPFGUIDX 118007 > ESE!Annemehr: > > Just for fun :> can we make another case? > > How about Hermione then? Excellent example of how the goddess JKR is really in charge of her universe. I'd say that the odds of that one being true are something less than a million to one, but it does go to show one reason why the books are so appealing: They are both unpredictable and reasonable. JKR does a good job of tying the logic together for where she goes, so it makes sense AFTER the fact but not before. Granted, the above would be SUCH a stretch that it would damage the books' credibility, but that doesn't mean JKR couldn't do it if she really wanted to. Long live JKR! Vivamus, whose cat Snickersqueak has been predictably unpredictable for 18 years From barbfulton at yahoo.com Tue Nov 16 17:33:42 2004 From: barbfulton at yahoo.com (Barb Fulton) Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2004 17:33:42 -0000 Subject: CHAPTER DISCUSSION: Chapter 31, O.W.L.s In-Reply-To: <20041115034946.39342.qmail@web53102.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118008 -most of Juli's post snipped > 1. Why was Draco Malfoy next to Harry during their Charms > exam? If they were called alphabetically, Draco must > have been called long before Harry. Barb: I don't think Draco would have been called long before Harry. There aren't exactly a ton of students between M and P (that we know of, anyway). I also expect that perhaps Malfoy was having trouble with his exam, so he might have taken longer than some others. > 3. Will Harry get enough OWLS to continue his career as > an Auror? Barb: yes, I think so. I think he did well enough in Charms, Transfiguration, Herbology and Care of Magical Creatures. He did an excellent job in DADA. Divination, Astronomy, and History don't matter, although I think he passed Astonomy and History. His only hang-up is Potions, and I think he'll either get a high enough grade, or there will be a change in staff. Mostly, I think Snape will be too prominent in the next 2 books to have Harry never see him. I see Harry getting 7 or 8 OWLS, everything except Divination and maybe History. > 4. If Fred and George only got about 3 OWLS each, what > classes did they have during their 6th and 7th year? > Only 3 classes? Barb: I think they probably got OWLs in Transfiguration, Charms, and Herbology. I also suspect that everyone takes DADA, no matter what their OWL result was. Defense is too important for everyone to prevent some students from taking it. Perhaps there is an advanced DADA for those who passed their OWL and a remedial-type DADA for those who didn't. If students didn't do well in DADA, it's even more important for them to keep taking it, I think, or they would be at an even greater risk from Voldie and the DE's. (that could be a band! Voldie and the Death Eaters! sorry, couldn't resist.) > 7. Do practical and written exams each count as an OWLS? Barb: I always thought that each exam would warrant it's own OWL (so most classes would be worth 2 OWLS. But then, even getting 12 would be failing a lot of exams, and it seems that 12 is exceptional. So I'm changing my mind-students can get 1 OWL for each class they take. That would make it 12 if you took every class Hogwarts offers, I believe. Very few students must get all 12 OWLs, though. The required classes I can recall are: Transfiguration, Potions, DADA, Charms, Herbology, Astronomy, and History of Magic. I also came up with 5 electives (a full schedule would include 2 or 3 of these, I believe): Divination, Muggle Studies, Care of Magical Creatures, Arithmancy, and Ancient Runes. (Correct me if I missed any.) So, to get all 12 OWLs, that must mean that either you can take OWLs for classes you didn't take in the 5th year (took in previous year(s), that others (at least Barty Jr and Percy) got Time Turners (I doubt it), or something else. Another thought...can Muggle borns test out of Muggle Studies? By that I mean, can they take the OWL without having taken the class, because they have certainly know about things like electricity. -Barb, who didn't realize that her post would be so long. Thanks for reading it! From stbjohn2 at yahoo.com Tue Nov 16 18:12:54 2004 From: stbjohn2 at yahoo.com (stbjohn2) Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2004 18:12:54 -0000 Subject: CHAPTER DISCUSSION: Chapter 31, O.W.L.s In-Reply-To: <20041115183942.21503.qmail@web53109.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118009 > > (Most of the post by JP snipped) > > > 7. Do practical and written exams each count as an > > OWLS? > > > JP: > > No, I dont believe that the written and practical > > exams each count as an OWL. I think that the exams > > has a certain percentage to the total amount of > > points needed to achieve an A, EE or an O grade. I > > think that the percentage is 50 - 50 : 50% for > > written exam and 50% for practical exam. The points > > acquired in both exams are then averaged and the > > result will determine the OWL grade. > > Juli wrote: > But then how could someone get 12 OWLs? I'm talking > about Barty Crouch Jr and Bill Weasley, they both got > 12 OWLs, and we know you can't have so many classes, > even Hermione couldn't handle more than 8 classes in > PoA, so how could anyone take 12? > Sandy now: I'm not sure why this particular subject interests me, but I actually took the time to look up canon when it came up on another discussion, and here's what I found: There are several snippets of quotes that indicate it's one OWL per subject, including "I expect you to scrape an `acceptable' in your OWL" --Snape (p 232) "I see no reason why everybody in this class should not achieve an OWL in transfiguration." MM (p257) If 2 OWLs were available (one each for theory and practical), neither Snape or MM would see one as acceptable; that would be totally out of character for either. "Isn't there a practical bit in our Defense against the Dark Arts OWL?" Pavarti (p244), which indicates that practical and theory "bits" combine for one OWL. Requirements for Healer include at least an E in NEWT Level in Potions, Herbology, transfiguration, charms and DADA. Based on the theory that NEWTs are earned in the same way as OWLs, if you could earn a separate NEWT in both theory and practice, it seems that requirements would specify NEWTs in both portions as a requirement. (After all, what good is a healer who understands the theory of Wolfsbane Potion but can't actually brew it, or who knows how to perform a cheering charm but not the theory of when it's appropriate to use it?) As for number of classes, as far as we know, there are 12 subjects taught at Hogwarts (History of magic, charms, potions, transfiguration, CoMC, Astronomy, DADA, Divination, Herbology, Ancient Runes, Arithmancy and Muggle Studies) Harry and Ron are taking 9, Hermione 10 (she was talking 12 during PoA). Since it's treated as quite remarkable that Barty and Percy (?) got 12 OWLs, it doesn't follow that they could do so by simply passing 2 portions of tests on 6 classes -- you'd think there'd be a student or two (heck, maybe most of Ravenclaw House) who could do that each year. (yes, I realize this does raise the possibility that Barty, and Percy, and who knows who else, may have used a time turner. All I can say is, hey in 1,000 years of Hogwarts, did you really think HG was the first to use the time turner? MM got it for her, which suggests it's a routine enough request to the MoM that DD didn't have to get involved.) Sandy, who is impressed she was able to find her notes on this matter, since she is a charter member of the My-Desk-Is-Messier-Than- JKR's Society From mgrantwich at yahoo.com Tue Nov 16 18:43:41 2004 From: mgrantwich at yahoo.com (Magda Grantwich) Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2004 10:43:41 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Sirius's Future In-Reply-To: <20041114.223746.432.10.annegirl11@juno.com> Message-ID: <20041116184341.89153.qmail@web53105.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 118010 --- annegirl11 at juno.com wrote: > 2. Sirius' character arc wasn't finished. When Sirius was young, he > was a brilliant wizard, an important order member, devoted friend, > and,if you will, imperfect boyfriend. As a man, post-Azkaban, he's > emotionally immature and depressed. And then he dies. His character > arc was cut off in mid-swing. Sirius was presented as a troubled > character, except his troubles were never resolved. (Note: > resolution doesn't mean fixing the problems; but it also doesn't > mean sticking him in stasis in his family home and never letting > him grow beyond who he was when we first met him.) > > Aura Well, I'm afraid I'm going to disagree with this point. Sirius didn't HAVE a story arc to leave unfinished - he existed to be a catalyst in outing Pettigrew's villainy in POA; he was the helpful but necessarily distant supporter and back-story hint provider in GOF; and he was the downward-spiralling-at-an-alarming-rate character in OOTP. His purpose post-POA was to represent to Harry an alternative family to the Dursleys and then have it cruelly yanked away. Sirius - as Sirius - didn't really have a place in the story beyond this. All through OOTP I had the impression that JKR was fastforwarding Sirius from the background to the foreground for some unknown purpose (I really didn't think he'd be the one to die; I thought it was going to be DUmbledore) and to make him a major character. Then when he died, I thought it was at least partly because she couldn't fit him into Harry's future development, that his refusal to get "past the past" and learn from his own and others' mistakes would only hinder Harry. Throughout GOF and OOTP Harry would hold in emotions or views that he knew would upset Sirius and cause him to do something reckless or put himself in danger of being caught. And Harry blamed himself a few times for Sirius doing just that, which struck me as a bad sign for their supposed closeness and intimacy. The reality is that Harry felt closest to Sirius when Sirius was farthest away or - more importantly - when Sirius was inaccessible. He never wanted to talk to Sirius more than when he couldn't, and his thought as Remus held him back from the veil that Sirius always came when Harry needed him is already a kind of amnesia about how stressed Harry often was by that very willingness of Sirius' to respond. Magda __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? The all-new My Yahoo! - Get yours free! http://my.yahoo.com From ginnysthe1 at yahoo.com Tue Nov 16 18:45:56 2004 From: ginnysthe1 at yahoo.com (ginnysthe1) Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2004 18:45:56 -0000 Subject: DD admits he is an Animagus In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118011 John wrote: >I was recently rereading one of my favorite chapters in OOTP which is titled "The Centaur and the Sneak" and I got to the scene where DD takes on Fudge, Umbridge, Kingsley, and Dawlish. Right before DD takes them all out (in less then a few seconds I might add, He is the Man) he refers to the snag in Fudge's plan, meaning that he will not come quietly. He says "I have absolutely no intention of being sent to Azkaban. I could break out of course-- but what a waste of time, and frankly, I can think of a whole host of things I would rather be doing".< >Since I have always wondered just how powerful DD is it got me thinking on the possible ways one could go about breaking out of Azkaban. We are presented with two possible ways in which one can do this. You can escape like the group of five DEs did, which is probably because the Dementors have let them escape on Voldemort's orders or He could go about the only other way we are presented with: escaping like Sirius did. The only reason Sirius was able to escape is that he was an Animagus. Dementors cannot sense the emotion of animals as well as they can sense the emotions of a human. He could transform into dog form whenever he needed a break from the constant soul sucking, and eventually he found the determination to slip through the bars after he was skinny enough. The Animagus form is the soul reason why Sirius could escape Azkaban. So from our evidence the only way DD would be able to escape the guards and Azkaban is if he was an Animagus. Plus if you add in the factor that Sirius told DD how he was able to escape Azkaban, it would give DD the knowledge (if he already didn't know) to escape Azkaban at anytime. This would only hold up however, if there is no other way to escape a Dementor without a wand. In closing, by saying he already knows how to escape Azkaban, DD has told us he is either an Animagus or a metamoramagus. Let me know what you think...< Kim responds: Wow! Kim (who asks, at risk of reprimand: How's that for a short post, Carol? ;-)) From nkafkafi at yahoo.com Tue Nov 16 18:54:29 2004 From: nkafkafi at yahoo.com (nkafkafi) Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2004 18:54:29 -0000 Subject: The Second Prophecy In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118012 > ESE!Annemehr: > > Just for fun :> can we make another case? > > How about Hermione then? Neri Nice work Annemehr! I just jumped in to remind everybody that ESE! Harry is taken. I have already developed this interesting possibility several months ago, and I'll prove it once I have the time to dive into Yahoomort and rescue that post. From ginnysthe1 at yahoo.com Tue Nov 16 19:00:33 2004 From: ginnysthe1 at yahoo.com (ginnysthe1) Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2004 19:00:33 -0000 Subject: The Riddles' Murders (WAS: The only one he ever feared? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118013 Kim wrote: > ...I was wondering specifically *who* taught young Tom the Unforgiveable Curses? Not that I really have any idea myself. Learning AKs, etc. would seem to require more than looking in a book, even for a gifted student. And at Hogwarts at least, these curses are pretty much forbidden, aren't they, despite the fact that Moody! Crouch taught them in GoF? So maybe learning Unforgiveables was part of an "underground movement" among the bad students (bad, as in mean and nasty), similar to the way "the Marauders" had to learn how to become animagi without the knowledge of their professors. But studying Unforgiveable Curses on one's own would have to be kept even more hushed up than studying animagus transfigurations, because of the shear illegality of Unforgiveables. Maybe TR and friends found outside help in their studies from unsavory types, whoever they may have been. Something to ponder anyway!< Apollo replied: >Assuming the Moody!Crouch was telling the truth - Riddle would have learned about them in his 6th year (depending on how powerful Grindelwald [sp?] was and with WW2 it wouldn't surprise me if they were taught about how to react to such encounters - much like Harry and Co. did) ... On top of that as well as the amount of Riddle possessed and his large amount of research (figuring out his ancestry, diary, etc), he was quite ahead of the rest of his class, even Dumbledore says so. And if they weren't taught anything about them, I'm sure Riddle would have come across it somewhere.< Kim asks again: Somewhere, yes, but where? Giving away my fervent belief in history, everything has to come from somewhere, even in the Wizarding World... From foxmoth at qnet.com Tue Nov 16 19:14:05 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2004 19:14:05 -0000 Subject: The Second Prophecy In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118014 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "nkafkafi" wrote: > > > Kneasy wrote: > > > > See? Both Peter and Sirius can be fitted into the first prophecy. > > And as a basic rule of thumb - when Jo offers alternatives, go for the one that will surprise Harry and many of the readers. > > After all, what's the point of a story like HP without the BANGS?Predictability is no fun at all. Pippin: Trouble is, PuppetMaster!DD wouldn't surprise Harry at all. He's the one who introduced us to the idea in the first place. We'd be shocked, but he wouldn't. Harry's only shocked when Dumbledore expresses weakness and isn't in control. > > Neri (after quoting JKR's testament to Sirius's love for Harry): > Of course, the solution to this small problem is obvious: There must be TWO people named Sirius in the HP saga, and JKR was referring to the other Sirius in this quote. > > Generally speaking, it would be very efficient to assume that there are two characters answering to each name in the WW, and one of them is on the good side while the other is on the dark side. This would enable JKR to say anything to us without (heaven forbid!) lying. < Pippin: LOL! Of course this is exactly the situation that was set up in GoF, where we had two Barty Crouch's. The tip-off for that was the grown-up son Tom Riddle in GoF ch 1. There is, AFAWK *no* character whose real name is Wormtail (the Marauder's Map never lies and we know he shows up as Pettigrew) ... you can't recognize a Death Eater by his alias, anymore than you can recognize him by his mask. Pippin From manawydan at ntlworld.com Tue Nov 16 19:20:38 2004 From: manawydan at ntlworld.com (manawydan) Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2004 19:20:38 -0000 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Muggleborns choosing WW References: <1100572083.5240.16149.m10@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <004401c4cc11$5c1e0c80$704b6d51@f3b7j4> No: HPFGUIDX 118015 Del wrote: >And all that for what ? For the right to live in a society that is >about as rotten as the one you came from, where most jobs are about as >dull and boring as the ones you would get in the Muggle World, and I wondered at this, and how you'd come to the conclusion that jobs were equally dull and boring as they are in Muggledom. My own reading suggests the opposite. The people who we see at work in the books all seem to be happy and fulfilled in what they're doing, not ust the ones in "glamorous" jobs like Bill and Charlie, but even the ones in a more "menial" role like Stan and Ernie on the bus. There doesn't seem to be a WW equivalent of things like burger bar attendants, call centre slaves, and so on. Unless you can give me some canon to the contrary Cheers Ffred O Benryn wleth hyd Luch Reon Cymru yn unfryd gerhyd Wrion Gwret dy Cymry yghymeiri From terryljames at hotmail.com Tue Nov 16 19:26:37 2004 From: terryljames at hotmail.com (terryljames76) Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2004 19:26:37 -0000 Subject: Godrics Hollow - What was the Secret? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118016 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "mhbobbin" wrote: > Uh-oh. If it was Harry as well, then we are back to the original > question. Why is Harry suddenly no longer covered by the Fidelius > Charm, allowing Hagrid to find him without having information > directly from the Secret Keeper. > > Mhbobbin Firstly, my apologies if I'm repeating something that's been covered many times on here; I've been off the list for months and months now, and have completely lost track of everything. My reasoning may be way off; if so, I'm sure someone will kindly correct me. :) That said, here's my take on the Secret Keeper issue. I have seen a lot of questions such as "How did Dumbledore know to send Hagrid to Godric's Hollow?" and "How did Sirius know to go to GH?" and then the one above, "Why is Harry suddenly no longer covered by the Fidelius charm?" (if he ever was). The assumption seems to be that no matter what, a person has to be directly told, by the Secret Keeper, to have the knowledge. That would be true, by my reading of canon, ONLY as long as the Fidelius charm remains intact. I've always thought that the secret remains intact only so long as the Secret Keeper does not reveal it--and this is the important part-- *to someone whom it is supposed to be a secret from*. For example, let's say I am planning a surprise birthday party for my husband. It's a secret from him. I can tell any of our friends whom I trust enough not to pass along the secret, and it is still a secret from him. It only ceases to be a secret when HE actually finds out. Along the same reasoning, in OOTP Dumbledore can tell Harry the location of 12 Grimmauld Place, just as he can tell the Order members, but it's still a secret. If, however, Dumbledore were to tell one of the Death Eaters the location, it would no longer be a "secret". I believe that under the magical rules of this spell, at that point the spell would be broken and whoever formerly knew would have the knowledge back. Therefore, the minute that Pettigrew went to Voldemort and told him where the Potters were--at that moment, the Fidelius charm was broken. Peter had NOT been "faithful", he had betrayed the secret to the person who was most of all NOT supposed to have it. Everyone who formerly knew where the Potters were, and had had the knowledge somehow removed or concealed through the Fidelius charm, suddenly remembered where they were and how to find them, and thus were alerted to the fact that something was wrong. Dumbledore realized that he now knew where the Potters were, and believing that Sirius was the Secret Keeper, also believed that Sirius had either turned traitor or had been tortured into revealing the secret; either way, he'd ask Hagrid if there had been "any trouble" with Sirius, not wanting to reveal too much about what he "knew". He knew immediately to send Hagrid to Godric's Hollow to find out what had happened. Sirius realized that he now knew where the Potters were, and realized immediately that since no one else knew that Peter was the Secret Keeper and therefore no one would be torturing Peter, then Peter must have given up the information voluntarily. He rushed straight to Godric's Hollow, and finding out that he was too late there, rushed straight out to find Peter, without stopping to explain anything to anyone. To me, this explains how everyone concerned knew as much as they did, when they did. I've also seen the question raised more than once (and sorry for not replying directly to it, but I'm trying to cram everything into one post) about why did Sirius, who boasted about being so strong and able to resist torture, want to make Peter the Secret Keeper, when he obviously thought that Peter was too weak to resist the DEs? Every time this question has come up, it has confused me. It seems fairly clear (to me) that Sirius never intended for Peter to be targeted or tortured at all. If they told no one about the Secret Keeper switch, then any Death Eaters who found out about the plan at all would only know that Sirius was the intended Secret Keeper, and they would come after him. They could torture him all they wanted, and he would not be able to reveal the location, because he *didn't know it*. Meanwhile, Peter and the location would be safe, because in Sirius' opinion, no one would consider that he would ever be chosen as the Secret Keeper and therefore no one would ever bother him. Of course, the flaw in all this seems to be something that Sirius never considered: that while he could not be made to reveal something he didn't know, he *could* be made to reveal something he *did* know; namely, that he was not in fact the Secret Keeper, and who *was*. So the whole plan would in the end be a big delaying tactic. But either that did not occur to Sirius, or he had such a high opinion of himself that he thought he would be able to resist telling this, especially if the DEs (who do not seem to be rocket scientists) never thought of asking. OK, those are my thoughts. Fire away! *returns to bunker deep deep underground* From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com Tue Nov 16 19:35:02 2004 From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (arrowsmithbt) Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2004 19:35:02 -0000 Subject: Who knows? DD knows, that's who. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118017 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "carolynwhite2" wrote: > snip> > But does it stop at a nod and a wink? Worryingly, of the four people > we have had identified as working in the Department of Mysteries > (Bode, Croaker, Rookwood, Avery), two are DEs, and a third was easily > Imperioed, then murdered. The fourth is unpromisingly > called 'Croaker' ? who's he destined to talk to? Kneasy: Talk to? Yes, 'croak' can mean harsh speech, but it's much more fun to use the other meaning - to die, to turn up the tootsies, to snuff it, peg out, kick the bucket - croak. And a croaker is a helpful soul who relieves another of the burdens inherent in shuffling through this vale of tears we call life. So who's he going to kill? Or has he already? Poor Bode. > snip> > What does the Department of Mysteries do anyway? > > Who is on the circulation list for the analysis reports? Probably not > Fudge. A security risk if there ever was one. Bet he's only been > cleared for need-to-know, deniable information. But Dumbledore? > Probably acts as a specialist advisor, even though he's not formally > on the staff. > > And then there are the clandestine research activities. The time > room. The brains floating in tanks. The locked room. Could they have > finally discovered something more powerful than magic ? DD certainly > hints that that's the case: 'a force that is at once more wonderful > and more terrible than death, than human intelligence, than the > forces of nature.' Crikey; hope they've put in for a Ludicrous Patent > up on Level 7. > > And apparently, whatever this force is, our Harry has it in > spades: snip Kneasy: Seems like the back-room boys are having a blast. Sounds like they've discovered Bill Gates. Might get it running by the time they get to v5.2 at which time they'll sue Harry for unauthorised copying. Might be a silly question, but in GoF they had horns. Assuming this isn't turning into an Italian Renaissance sex-comedy, what's all that about? snip > It is probably more useful to view the Possession incident rather as > a lab test, where DD is checking a hypothesis about the way Harry and > Voldemort are likely to interact. > > Look at the calm way he says 'Are you all right?' to Harry, after > the boy has experienced the equivalent of the electric chair. After > pulling Harry to his feet, there's not even a brief hug, or manly > clap on the shoulder. An 'apparently satisfied' DD moves on promptly > to dealing with Fudge. It's a pretty clinical reaction. The outcome > of an experiment had been correctly predicted; the subject had > responded as expected. > Kneasy: A very emotional chap, our Albus - when it suits him. Remember how terribly cut up he was about James and Lily: (McGonagall) "James and Lily...I can't believe it....I didn't want to believe it....Oh, Albus..." "I know...I know..." he said heavily. Nice epitaph there, Albus. Then there was the speech after Cedric's death - "His death has affected you all, whether you knew him well or not.." No 'us' - just 'you'. DD, you're a brick - or something similar, anyway. > Carolyn: > In fact when you think about it, isn't Dumbledore doing rather too > well? Effortlessly, it seems he's a step ahead all the time. Sitting > up there in his office, sucking sherbet lemons. He's been proved > right about Voldie and as a result, can kick ass at the Ministry. > They've only lost Sirius so far, who was a liability anyway. The > kid's a bit upset, granted, but, hey, welcome to the real world; he > needs to grow up. Various key players are all in position ? the rat, > Snape. He has a good idea who might try to betray him, or be unequal > to their task. Kneasy: I've said it before, I'll say it again - he's read the script. He knows what is supposed to happen (not the same as does happen - I reckon the TWT Portkey was one hell of a shock) but in general terms. He just tweaks events to make sure things stay on track. > snip> > Over the years these factors have persuaded him to believe the WW is > doomed, and the Right Thing, the Best Thing would be to help speed > its end. He has laid his plans accordingly. He intends to wake the > sleeping dragon under Hogwarts, and whilst it is defending the school > in the coming battle against Voldemort, he will destroy the source of > all magic that it was guarding. > Kneasy: I like it! Gotterdammerung! Ragnarok! The Fenris Wolf (Lupin), the Great Serpent (Slytherin), Hagrid as Thor, DD as Odin (Moody would be better; never mind), blood everywhere, Hogwarts/Valhalla burns, the Giant Squid gently poaches to form a sea-food platter with Trevor and the Merpeople, maybe three survive and then Yggdrasil (the Whomping Willow - should be an ash but who cares?) sprouts again. A new world. A satisfyingly cathartic climax. Cue credits. > > Carolyn > Who thinks Kneasy is a bad influence Tsk, tsk. Why blame me? As you know I'm totallly opposed to gratuitous violence, calumny and fanciful theories. You must be thinking of three other fellas. From foxmoth at qnet.com Tue Nov 16 19:57:04 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2004 19:57:04 -0000 Subject: Muggleborns choosing WW In-Reply-To: <004401c4cc11$5c1e0c80$704b6d51@f3b7j4> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118018 > Del wrote: > >And all that for what ? For the right to live in a society that is > >about as rotten as the one you came from, where most jobs are about asdull and boring as the ones you would get in the Muggle World, and FFred > I wondered at this, and how you'd come to the conclusion that jobs were equally dull and boring as they are in Muggledom. > > My own reading suggests the opposite. The people who we see at work in the books all seem to be happy and fulfilled in what they're doing, not ust the ones in "glamorous" jobs like Bill and Charlie, but even the ones in a more "menial" role like Stan and Ernie on the bus.<< Pippin: It seems to me jobs are like marriages, the people who are happy in them can find just as many things to complain about as the ones who aren't. We can't be sure Stan and Ernie aren't happy and contented because they've been taught not to aspire to anything better, just like the House Elves. I do wonder about the person who has the potential to be a skillful surgeon or a brilliant software engineer, but has only a mediocre magical talent. Are they really better off in the WW? It's fun to wish we were witches and wizards, but the law of averages predicts that half of us will be less talented than the other half. Pippin From nrenka at yahoo.com Tue Nov 16 20:09:12 2004 From: nrenka at yahoo.com (nrenka) Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2004 20:09:12 -0000 Subject: JKR's writing in OoP (was Re: Sirius's Future) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118019 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "lupinlore" wrote: > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "cat_kind" > wrote: >> >> Why do deaths have to be significant or life-lessons? They >> aren't in Real Life, perhaps that is the point JKR was trying to >> make? No, Sirius' death doesn't make much sense, and that's exactly >> why I think it might be well written after all. > > Lupinlore: > I think this is true. Death, particularly in war, often is sudden, > random, and SEEMINGLY pointless (although remember that JKR has > said there was a reason for Sirius death). The thing that keeps recurring to me today is 'literary economy'. And it leaves me conflicted, as so much does. :) On the one hand, not all details are meaningful. Many times, reading interviews with writers and such, they comment about knowing your characters, and getting a feel for things--and that's what it takes to write. Things where every single detail is a Symbolic Clue generally get old, at least in the style of the modern novel. Details are often just there to make a world live and breathe. On the other hand, novels are often generally awfully similar, in some ways, to RPGs (role-playing games). There's a very true joke about cliches in these games: anything on the map is significant--the designers don't have the space or time to create intricate caves that don't have treasure at the end, or plot relationships. I generally feel this holds somewhat true for the mystery/fantasy/adventure of Harry Potter, too--anyone who has a significant amount of time spent on them has it done for a reason. This may, however, be more atmospheric than strictly plot related, and it's the balance between the two that she exploits for her own amusement at our confusion. OotP doesn't stand alone very well, I've considered from when I finished it (and Renee mentioned upthread). I'm waiting to see what the literary payoff is for the truncation of Sirius' character arc, because she's promised that there is some. And we (in the general sense) shall have to agree to disagree about his (now null and void) potentiality as a continuing character. I can think of many things that could have been done with him, and some unresolved issues. Final evaluation will have to wait for the continuation of threads. -Nora gets ready for some hard-core opera going and thus vanishes until tomorrow From cat_kind at yahoo.com Tue Nov 16 20:13:12 2004 From: cat_kind at yahoo.com (cat_kind) Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2004 20:13:12 -0000 Subject: JKR's writing in OoP (was Re: Sirius's Future) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118020 > Renee: > I seem to remember JKR saying somewhere that it was necessary for > Sirius to die and that we would find out why in the next book. OotP > is less of a standalone than the previous books, so it's perhaps a > bit premature to say it doesn't make sense. > Also, Sirius's death may not be overly dramatic, Harry's reaction to > it certainly is, and that's where the significance lies. catkind: Oh, I didn't know she said that. Is it me or are there FAR too many hints about the next book already? I do hope JKR shuts up about it soon, or it's going to be no fun by the time we actually get to read the thing. Actually, if there was one thing that really spoiled OotP for me, it is the fact that we knew in advance that somebody was going to die, and then there were all these cartoonish near-misses... I wonder what she means by that though? Sirius had to die so that XYZ plot device can be used in the next book? Or that there really was something deeper going on in the DoM? Or just why falling through a curtain is deadly? I don't think whether it has significance in the later books affects the question of whether the death is well-written or not. At the time it seems senseless and unfair, to Harry and some readers. Harry's reaction is overly dramatic for what? It's certainly in character with his behaviour in the rest of the book, he's dramatic about everything, particularly Dumbledore and Sirius. And - well - poor tragic orphan loses yet another father figure... catkind (buttoning its ears) From candlekicks at yahoo.ca Tue Nov 16 20:22:12 2004 From: candlekicks at yahoo.ca (candlekicks) Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2004 20:22:12 -0000 Subject: DD admits he is an Animagus In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118021 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "ginnysthe1" wrote: > > John wrote: > >I was recently rereading one of my favorite chapters in OOTP which > is titled "The Centaur and the Sneak" and I got to the scene where DD > takes on Fudge, Umbridge, Kingsley, and Dawlish. Right before DD > takes them all out (in less then a few seconds I might add, He is the > Man) he refers to the snag in Fudge's plan, meaning that he will not > come quietly. He says "I have absolutely no intention of being sent > to Azkaban. I could break out of course-- but what a waste of time, > and frankly, I can think of a whole host of things I would rather be > doing".< > > >Since I have always wondered just how powerful DD is it got me > thinking on the possible ways one could go about breaking out of > Azkaban. major snip!! Let me know what you think...< > > Kim responds: > Wow! > > Kim (who asks, at risk of reprimand: How's that for a short post, > Carol? ;-)) Linda: I don't think that DD needs either of the two methods described in John's post to escape from Azkaban. DD can most likely produce a patronus of such power (a phoenix for sure!) that the Dementors would not be able to stop him from leaving. He does not seem the type to be overcome by the bad things that have happened in his life, they are just part of the adventure he is on. I dare Fudge to summon enough of them to take DD in! From flamingstarchows at att.net Tue Nov 16 20:25:03 2004 From: flamingstarchows at att.net (texaschow) Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2004 20:25:03 -0000 Subject: DD admits he is an Animagus In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118022 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "johnbowman19" wrote: > > I was recently rereading one of my favorite chapters in OOTP > which is titled "The Centaur and the Sneak" and I got to the scene > where DD takes on Fudge, Umbridge, Kingsley, and Drawlish. Right > before DD takes them all out (in less then a few seconds I might add, > He is the Man) he refers to the snag in Fudge's plan, meaning that he > will not come quietly. He says " I have absolutely no intention of > being sent to Azkaban. I could break out of course-- but what a waste > of time, and frankly, I can think of a whole host of things I would > rather be doing". Since I have always wondered just how powerful DD it > got me thinking on the possible ways one could go about breaking out > of Azkaban. > In closing, by saying he already knows how to escape Azkaban, DD has > told us he is either an Animagus or a metamoramagus. > > Let me know what you think, > John Now ~Cathy~ I hope I didn't get too snip crazy - just trying to shorten it up a bit. To me, the most obvious means of escape for Dumbledore would be through the sames means that he escaped from Fudge and the others in his office - by using Fawkes. Fawkes could pop into his cell at Azkaban, and then vanish again with Dumbledore grasping his tail. From olivier.fouquet+harry at m4x.org Tue Nov 16 20:29:24 2004 From: olivier.fouquet+harry at m4x.org (olivierfouquet2000) Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2004 20:29:24 -0000 Subject: Evile!Everyone was (The second Prophesy) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118023 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "nkafkafi" wrote: > > > Kneasy wrote: > > > > See? Both Peter and Sirius can be fitted into the first prophecy. > > And as a basic rule of thumb - when Jo offers alternatives, go for > the > > one that will surprise Harry and many of the readers. > > After all, what's the point of a story like HP without the BANGS? > > Predictability is no fun at all. > > Neri: > > I just wanted to help Kneasy a bit with his theory. Some gullible and > dull list member might object to this theory on the ground that > Sirius can't be Voldemort's servant if he loved James and Harry so > much, as JKR mentions in: > http://www.jkrowling.com/textonly/faq_view.cfm?id=61 > > "Sirius's great redeeming quality is how much affection he is capable > of feeling. He loved James like a brother and he went on to transfer > that attachment to Harry." > > Of course, the solution to this small problem is obvious: There must > be TWO people named Sirius in the HP saga, and JKR was referring to > the other Sirius in this quote. > > Generally speaking, it would be very efficient to assume that there > are two characters answering to each name in the WW, and one of them > is on the good side while the other is on the dark side. This would > enable JKR to say anything to us without (heaven forbid!) lying. > > Neri In fact, there are two Harry as well. And Evil!Harry was actually trying to give the Prophesy to the DEs, with the help of ESE!Lupin and ESE!Neville. I mean, look it up, do any of the actions of Harry in the MoM and with the Thestrals make sense? Why, suppose Harry is actually a doppelganger with evil intentions and so many mysteries are solved. Of course, I would readily abandon this theory if anything in canon showed that it is not the case, but I can't find the least evidence against it. All that to say I laughed a lot at your post Neri. Olivier From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com Tue Nov 16 20:57:06 2004 From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (Barry Arrowsmith) Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2004 20:57:06 +0000 Subject: The Second Prophecy Message-ID: <132C51F6-3812-11D9-91F3-000A9577CB94@btconnect.com> No: HPFGUIDX 118024 Responses to more than one post here, otherwise I'll be up all night. First up annemehr, > I'm just wondering if we can add another name to the possibilities for the first prophecy. I mean, Barty Crouch, Jr. Just for fun can we make another case? How about Hermione then? All of his friends! All three of them! Well, maybe not. :) The ESE theories can stand alone, so really, any combination of them can be true, as long as it includes ESE!Peter (now there's a challenge: come up with an Innocent!Peter theory!). But going by "Snapes Worst Memory," I could readily believe that James was not so good at choosing friends when he was young and arrogant. I'm sure Lily's good; she's probably the one who deflated his head, but he never broke with his friends, evil or not. > Kneasy: Barty, Hermione, you can choose who you like. I'll be interested to see the posts you produce. Look on it as "an exercise for the reader". Nah. As I say, I reckon Lupin is on DD's side; he owes him a lot, what with accepting him in Hogwarts, protecting him, giving him a job and whatever. Lupin probably has more loyalty to DD than he ever did to James or Sirius. And since (for the moment) DD looks like a goody, then Lupin probably is too. But Innocent!Peter. There's a challenge. Might take you up on that. But fair warning, it'll be mostly circumstantial evidence, not much canon around to back that one up, so it'll be 'coulds',, 'mights', 'maybes'. You know - like the SHIPping posts. > Dungrollin: But that didn't help Voldy to rise again, did it? That was afterwards. In order to make that bit of the prophecy apply to Sirius, you need to postulate how he could have been useful to Voldy before the end of GoF. What did Voldy need to rise again? The information from Bertha Jorkins about the TWT and the stuff behind the memory charm about Crouch The Younger being alive, some help from Wormtail and Nagini... What else could Sirius have done to qualify? > Kneasy: The end of GoF? Why? The graveyard scene was just the resurrection. Q. Is Voldy greater and more terrible than ever? A. Like hell he is. He's in hiding along with the mad bitch and his backing band is in the slammer. So there's a *lot* more to come. And since Jo has stated that we're going to find out more about (not from - about) Sirius, I reckon that it ain't going to be good news for the Siriophiles. Remember, he *had* to die. Sounds promising, that. So far as we are aware Sirius has never been noted for good works and Boy Scout rectitude. If he had been we'd have heard by now. He's a Black family member; pureblood and acts like it. JKR makes much of bloodlines and Sirius has probably bred true. One thing about Sirius - he always lets his friends down. Expect bad news re: Sirius. > Patrick: Just because we can plainly see SPT is a fraud in class, we shouldn't think that her "genuine" prophesies are frauds (not saying you are, just sticking this in here...) These are done, like you said, in a fit of impulse. She doesn't realize she did it, she probably wouldn't know them if you played it for her. Given that, I don't know that the prophesies have the opportunity to be clouded by the Seer's own knowledge. She doesn't know she gave the proph, why should she be able to cloud the message. This goes back to the nature of prophesies. snip > Kneasy: Yes, I agree mostly. Oracles are usually depicted as being in some other mental state - usually drug induced (somebody has got at her tea-pot maybe). She's an old duck and it's happened to her just twice in 16 years. I'm not even certain she knows she produced the first one any more than the second, which she vehemently denied all knowledge of to Harry. The 'other' state supposedly allows visions, messages to come through in RW thinking. (Don't believe in it myself, but some take it seriously.) If so then your depiction of being a conduit is apposite; it's not her at all, it's something else using her. Next question: What? Where are they coming from (in the WW I mean); from behind the veil? > Neri: I just wanted to help Kneasy a bit with his theory. Some gullible and dull list member might object to this theory on the ground that Sirius can't be Voldemort's servant if he loved James and Harry so much, as JKR mentions in: http://www.jkrowling.com/textonly/faq_view.cfm?id=61 Kneasy: There's not necessarily a contradiction. Do bad people never love? Of course they do - and they often betray those they've loved. And nobody has satisfactorily proved that James was so perfect either; in fact he demonstrably wasn't. And since Sirius projects James onto Harry..... > Pippin: Trouble is, PuppetMaster!DD wouldn't surprise Harry at all. He's the one who introduced us to the idea in the first place. We'd be shocked, but he wouldn't. Harry's only shocked when Dumbledore expresses weakness and isn't in control. > Kneasy: True. And it's only after the the implications of his little chat at the end of OoP that it'll start sinking in just how much he may have been manipulated. But Harry would be shocked by unpleasant revelations about Sirius. Ah, youthful illusions. Much better when you outgrow them. From hickengruendler at yahoo.de Tue Nov 16 21:13:18 2004 From: hickengruendler at yahoo.de (hickengruendler) Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2004 21:13:18 -0000 Subject: Plot in OotP Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118025 Hickengruendler: In a few recent posts, I read the opinion by some posters, that OotP has let Plot than the previous books. Some where quite happy with this, others disappointed. But I just question this statement that there was less plot in the previous books. Admittingly, there wasn't a Plot twist like in the previous books (as far as we know, maybe the ESE!Lupin people will be proven right, although I must admit, I really don't think so). No innocent pets turning out to be Death Eaters, and no highly suspicious characters who actually turned out quite okay (although this is not entirely true, there was Zacharias Smith, but he had nothing to do with the main plot). However, a good plot isn't only about a possible twist. I think OotP was a very well plotted book, with one incident consequently leading to another. For example: Because Fudge doesn't believe Harry, Umbridge is appointed High Inquisitor. Because Umbridge is appointed High Inquisitor, she sacks Trelawney. Because Trelawney is sacked and Dumbledore wants her to stay, he hires Firenze. Because Firenze is hired, the centaurs get angry. Because the centaurs were offended, Hermione finally developed a plan to get rid of Umbridge, thus closing the circle. Another example: Because Umbridge refuses to teach them proper DADA, the kids grounded the DA. Because of the DA, Dumbledore in the end had to leave Hogwarts. Because Dumbledore left Hogwarts, Harry couldn't go to him for help after his dream about Sirius. Because of this (and some other things, like Snape stopping to teach Harry Occlumency), Harry and his friends had to go to the DoM themselves and actually had to use, what they learnt. Admittingly, there were a few useless bits, but not more than in the other books. What, for example, does the Quidditch-Cup have to do with the storyline in PoA? But most incidents in OotP come together for the climax where they have some inportance, and if they don't, than most of them were comic-relief, that served as an entertainment for the readers, for example the interacting between McGonagall and Umbridge and the Twins' schemes. IMO, GoF is, despite the Moody/Crouch plot twist, a plot wise much weaker book than OotP. What purpose does the TWT really serve? There were some action scenes and a few new characters were introduced, but that's all. The fake Moody made his plan unnecessary difficult, because he could have turned everything into a portkey to send Harry to Voldemort, instead of the Triwizard Cup. Therefore in retrospective, although GoF is my favourite book from the series (mostly because of the ending), you can say that the first 4/5 of the book were completely useless, quite in contrast to OotP, with it's slow build-up to the big bang. Also, OotP developed some characters or at least we got some more insight in them, and if there have to be for the main plot "useless" scenes, than I rather want to have them used for character developed, than for some pointless action scenes. Another poster criticized, that nothing really changed at the end of OotP. That's not really true. The main conflict in OotP was not between Harry and Voldemort, but between the Harry (and his supporters) and the ministry. And this conflict was resolved in the end. Of course the main situation concerning Voldemort roughly remains the same, but that is true for every other book as well, except obviously GoF. At the beginning of PS Voldemort was gone, and in the end he still was. The same is true for CoS and for PoA. Of course, in the end of PoA there was a slight difference, with Pettigrew on the loose. But this slight difference was in OotP as well, with now everybody believing Harry. Also, did we really expect some big development on the Voldie front? The series has seven books, not five. Of course I can't speak for everyone else, but I at least was not surprised that there was not much about the Harry/Voldemort conflict in the book. But I do think this will change in HBP. I think that at the end of the next book, Voldemort will have won a major battle (he sort of has to, to keep him at least remotely dangerous), and therefore the Status-Quo will change contra Harry. Hickengruendler From carolynwhite2 at aol.com Tue Nov 16 21:26:37 2004 From: carolynwhite2 at aol.com (carolynwhite2) Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2004 21:26:37 -0000 Subject: The Second Prophecy/Innocent!Peter In-Reply-To: <132C51F6-3812-11D9-91F3-000A9577CB94@btconnect.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118026 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Barry Arrowsmith wrote: (in response to Annemehr): > But Innocent!Peter. There's a challenge. Might take you up on that. But fair warning, it'll be mostly circumstantial evidence, not much canon around to back that one up, so it'll be 'coulds',, 'mights', 'maybes'. > You know - like the SHIPping posts. > Ahem, says Carolyn: Reminding people of a good paper from ConventionAlley: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/115979 which prompted an interminable analysis of ESE! plots in post 115794. I think what motivates Peter is one of the most interesting subplots in the book. If he did betray everyone (a very big If), and she never explains why, I will be peeved. From kelsey_dangelo at yahoo.com Tue Nov 16 21:33:11 2004 From: kelsey_dangelo at yahoo.com (Kelsey Dangelo) Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2004 13:33:11 -0800 (PST) Subject: Lupin In-Reply-To: <1100639623.5704.74187.m7@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <20041116213311.46380.qmail@web53106.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 118027 Susan said: <> Kelsey here: Hi. I agree. I would be really interesting if Lupin and Sirius were the next Gabby and Xena (subtextual same-sex romance). It would really bring the idea of same-sex love into the mainstream and bring more tolerance and understanding. Plus, it would be so sweet! And you're absolutely right!; it doesn't have to be explicit, but simply a romantic same-sex relationship. But, why is the music in the boggart scene "appropriate" for a gay Lupin? Why does calling Padfoot's name when he's turning into a werewolf mean romantic love? I personally don't see the film portrayal of Lupin as necessarily gay. I see him as a very sad, sickly, not-necessarily overtly-masculine teacher. That's Lupin's natural character, and I don't see that as meaning that he's gay (not even in the stereotypical sense). I'm going to read someone's suggested essay on the possible relationship between Lupin and Black, but at the moment, I'm going to invoke an argument used back in my college says while discussing Xena and Gabby. Of course they call to each other, hug, and act close, they're best friends. They've gone through a lot, and they care deeply about each other. To make it into a romance would almost degrade the relationship (personal experience is talking, as I remember being put off by the thought of dating one of my male friends, because he was a friend, and I had never thought of him like that). They hugged like brothers, and that's I guess the way I'll always see them, like brothers, perhaps more than brotherly-friendship love. To bring this out of "shipping", I'll add this. I like your idea that Lupin's condition is allegorical for being gay (considering his being forced to resign because people won't want him teaching). That is heart-breakingly true. I've always felt that it was allegorical for AIDS or some other disease. First of all, there is a very real danger being a werewolf or contracting AIDS as they both make you weak, sick, and near-death. Second, you are a danger to others, as the disease is contagious. Therefore, one is often alone or treated poorly by the ignorant (being fired or avoided). One is afraid to be close to others, others are afraid to be close to you. Third, with easily-taken precautions (wolfsbane, hiding during a full moon, safe sex, careful with spilt blood), one can live a nearly-normal life and be close to people. Fourth, (not to sound callous or cruel), it can be possibly prevented through safe and careful behavior (Lupin says something like, "when I was foolhardy"). I like the idea that Lupin is allegorical for someone with AIDS or another disease/handicap, as it is often a very real, very confusing and not-often discussed prejudice. Some people, as with Lupin, feel justified for having the prejudice against people with AIDS ("they deserve it", or "they could harm society"). But I also like the idea that he might be gay, because he is such a wonderfully effective, good, and caring teacher/person that we see him as a person, not a sexual-preference. Kelsey, who wonders if the real reason that she doesn't like the idea of Black/Lupin love is the same reason they tell rock stars not to tell they fan-girls that they have wives and girlfriends. __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From kelsey_dangelo at yahoo.com Tue Nov 16 21:35:05 2004 From: kelsey_dangelo at yahoo.com (Kelsey Dangelo) Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2004 13:35:05 -0800 (PST) Subject: Did DD lie about the Prophecy? / Sirius In-Reply-To: <1100639623.5704.74187.m7@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <20041116213505.49253.qmail@web53108.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 118028 Kneasy: <> Kelsey: Not quite sure what's going on here, so I'll speak in a mousy little voice, and ask, "Are you saying what I think you're say? Are you saying that Sirius is ESE?" NOOO!! It can't be, it just can't be. The one comforting thought I had as my most beloved character slipped through the veil was, "well, at least he died as good as I believed him to be." Ok, long, deep, breaths. First of all. Sirius asked Harry to come live with him, once Sirius' name was cleared. So he wasn't trying to suggest that Harry hide out with him on the run or something. Sirius and Harry were assuming, at that point that Sirius would be cleared, he would be free to walk the streets and live a normal life, and buy a nice house in the suburbs (not Grim-old-place) and live happy normal wizards lives. Haha, sob. << the person who bears a large proportion of the blame for the deaths of his parents ( and that's if you're of a generous disposition - Sirius being stupidly brilliant with the SK swap - if you're more suspicious you may think a lot worse).>> Oh yes, but that's _why_ I love Sirius' pathetic character so very much. "Stupidly brilliant" is right!!!! Sirius is a brilliant guy (his teachers say so, he acts intelligent and logical in the cave at Hogsmeade). So, he thinks logically that Voldemort will come after him, best friend of James. Sirius is willing to die to save the Potters, but he knows that that is not enough. So he uses his intelligence to protect them, using the SK switchero. (Hey, it would have worked perfectly if Wormtail wasn't the spy. In fact, it worked so well that 13 years later, everyone, including DD thought Sirius was the SK). It's not Sirius' fault that Wormtail lived up to his name. Fast forward years spent in Azkaban, forced to relive his guilt over and over again (torment is so attractive..., um, what was I saying, oh, yeah...). Everyone says that Sirius was unable to mature because of years spent in Azkaban. I agree, and yet, I also have to make the point that Sirius acts as most people would, in his situation. He's faced with moral decisions. Follow his brain/logic/intelligence or follow his emotions/heart? Well, last time he used logic/intelligence, it failed him and cost him his best friends. If he'd followed his emotions/heart and protected them himself, things may have worked better. Sirius failed. But it wasn't really his fault. Poor guy. Kelsey, who can sympathize with Sirius' problem of his debating heart and head. __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Meet the all-new My Yahoo! - Try it today! http://my.yahoo.com From hautbois1 at comcast.net Tue Nov 16 21:35:53 2004 From: hautbois1 at comcast.net (ohnooboe) Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2004 21:35:53 -0000 Subject: DD admits he is an Animagus In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118029 john wrote He says " I have absolutely no intention of > being sent to Azkaban. I could break out of course-- but what a waste of time, and frankly, I can think of a whole host of things I would rather be doing". Pat here: I need to say that just reading the quote in your post gave me goosebumps. That scene in OotP, with DD sticking it to the man, is by FAR my favorite. OOOooo! *shivers* john said: Since I have always wondered just how powerful DD it > got me thinking on the possible ways one could go about breaking out > of Azkaban. We are presented with two possible ways in which one can > do this. You can escape like the group of five DEs did, which is > probably because the Dementors have let them escape on Voldemort's > orders or He could go about the only other way we are presented with: escaping like Sirius did. Patrick: I do agree, mostly because the DD/Anim. theory is one I stick to. I believe it, yes I do! But, DD being who he is, maybe he does have other ways. He flattened a whole room of people with seemingly no effort (and with no bad magical hangovers for any of the recipients of the blast). However, perhaps (or very likely) he possesses some power that doesn't so much drive dementors off (the Patronus Charm) but completely annihilates them. Granted, I can think of times the he'd have used that power, but he seems to me to be rather reserved in his displays of power. The Uber-fight in the MoM is the most major magic DD's ever done in front of us. I'd be curious to see DD play out the "Escape from Azkaban" without the animagus possibility just to see what he would do. Patrick From spotthedungbeetle at hotmail.com Tue Nov 16 22:41:11 2004 From: spotthedungbeetle at hotmail.com (dungrollin) Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2004 22:41:11 -0000 Subject: The Second Prophecy In-Reply-To: <132C51F6-3812-11D9-91F3-000A9577CB94@btconnect.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118031 > Dungrollin: > But that didn't help Voldy to rise again, did it? That was > afterwards. In order to make that bit of the prophecy apply to > Sirius, you need to postulate how he could have been useful to > Voldy before the end of GoF. What did Voldy need to rise again? > The information from Bertha Jorkins about the TWT and the stuff > behind the memory charm about Crouch The Younger being alive, some > help from Wormtail and Nagini... What else could Sirius have done > to qualify? > > > Kneasy: > The end of GoF? Why? The graveyard scene was just the resurrection. Dungrollin: Okay, I'll grudgingly grant you that. But... Kneasy again: > Q. Is Voldy greater and more terrible than ever? > A. Like hell he is. He's in hiding along with the mad bitch and > his backing band is in the slammer. Dungrollin: And Sirius is now dead. In which case, hasn't he left it a little late to be giving a helping hand on achieving greatness and terribleness surpassing previous efforts? Or... You're not in sad denial too, are you...? Dungrollin Who's not so fond of smileys, but feels that a couple may be appropriate after that last comment... From gbannister10 at aol.com Tue Nov 16 22:48:15 2004 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2004 22:48:15 -0000 Subject: Harry's moral core vs. Voldie's In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118032 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "ginnysthe1" wrote: Kim: > I've also wondered about the origin of the name Marvolo. Sure > doesn't sound British. Italian? Spanish? Portuguese? Hmmm... I > just did a search in a source that contains lots of names from all > over the world, and there wasn't a single Marvolo. Doesn't mean it's > not a real name someplace, but it could be a pure creation of JKR. Geoff: Probably totally irrelevant but I've always had a silly habit of associating the name with a circus performer..... "Ladies and gentlemen, I give you the unique, the all-powerful, the irreplaceable, the master magician, the Great Marvolo..." (roll of drums etc.) Geoff http://www.aspectsofexmoor.com From gbannister10 at aol.com Tue Nov 16 22:54:13 2004 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2004 22:54:13 -0000 Subject: Who knows? DD knows, that's who. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118033 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "arrowsmithbt" wrote: Kneasy: > I like it! Gotterdammerung! Ragnarok! The Fenris Wolf (Lupin), the Great > Serpent (Slytherin), Hagrid as Thor, DD as Odin (Moody would be better; > never mind), blood everywhere, Hogwarts/Valhalla burns, the Giant Squid > gently poaches to form a sea-food platter with Trevor and the Merpeople, > maybe three survive and then Yggdrasil (the Whomping Willow - should > be an ash but who cares?) sprouts again. > A new world. A satisfyingly cathartic climax. Cue credits. > > > > > Carolyn > > Who thinks Kneasy is a bad influence > > Tsk, tsk. Why blame me? > As you know I'm totallly opposed to gratuitous violence, calumny and > fanciful theories. You must be thinking of three other fellas. Geoff: Why is it when you go into this "taking everybody with you when you go" mode that I am strangely reminded of Bumble in "Oliver Twist" who castigated the Sowerberrys after Oliver had escaped because they had fed him meat? BTW, you forgot the White Witch, Sauron and the Einheriar of the Herlathing inter alia.... Geoff http://www.aspectsofexmoor.com From annegirl11 at juno.com Tue Nov 16 23:15:25 2004 From: annegirl11 at juno.com (annegirl11 at juno.com) Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2004 18:15:25 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] JKR's writing in OoP (was Re: Sirius's Future) Message-ID: <20041116.181526.3216.1.annegirl11@juno.com> No: HPFGUIDX 118034 This reply is to no one in particular. I know the party line. I get it. Sirius supposedly died because death is sudden, it has no meaning, yadda yadda. I'm not saying that wasn't JKR's intention. What I'm saying is that, in critiquing OOtP -- without fanwanking or information gleaned from interviews -- that theme didn't come across. Here's the thing: *Cedric's* death was a pointless death that was well-written and well executed. I sobbed for that kid, for the pointlessness and the waste. GoF is well-written, and the Cemetary scene was extremely effective. The MM scene is poorly written, shaky, and, as someone said, cartoonish. When Sirius died, all I felt was, "wtf?" I wasn't convinced that this happened for any reason other than that JKR felt like it. The text is ineffective. The one possible explanation I've heard is that Sirius' death will be explained in the next book. (This doesn't change that OOtP is a poorly written book, compared to the rest of the series, but can, theoretically explain the Sirius gap.) I guess it's a matter of opinion, then, whether or not a book in a series is fair game for literary crit before the series is finished. My feeling is that the HP books are separate literary entities in their own right; readers have the right to think about them independant of the other books. As OOtP stands, I feel that *many* aspects of the book, not just Sirius, were poorly done. Aura ~*~ "What he didn't like about heroes was that they were usually suicidally gloomy when sober and homicidally insane when drunk." - Discword http://archive.skyehawke.com/authors.php?no=606 From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Tue Nov 16 23:16:01 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2004 23:16:01 -0000 Subject: Did DD lie about the Prophecy? / Sirius In-Reply-To: <20041116213505.49253.qmail@web53108.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118035 Kelsey wrote : "First of all. Sirius asked Harry to come live with him, once Sirius' name was cleared. So he wasn't trying to suggest that Harry hide out with him on the run or something. Sirius and Harry were assuming, at that point that Sirius would be cleared, he would be free to walk the streets and live a normal life, and buy a nice house in the suburbs (not Grim-old-place) and live happy normal wizards lives. Haha, sob." Del replies : Well, yes, but that's precisely the problem : Harry *couldn't* go and live a happy normal wizard life with Sirius. He *needed* to stay at Privet Drive for his own protection. But can you imagine DD trying to explain that to Harry ? Harry would have blown up a pipe or two... Kelsey wrote : " So, he thinks logically that Voldemort will come after him, best friend of James. Sirius is willing to die to save the Potters, but he knows that that is not enough. So he uses his intelligence to protect them, using the SK switchero. (Hey, it would have worked perfectly if Wormtail wasn't the spy. In fact, it worked so well that 13 years later, everyone, including DD thought Sirius was the SK). It's not Sirius' fault that Wormtail lived up to his name." Del replies : Still not convinced, sorry. Let's go over the possibilities once again, shall we ? 1. Sirius manages to escape LV long enough for whoever to get rid of LV. In that case, he might as well have been SK himself. 2. LV manages to capture Sirius. 2.1. Sirius dies without revealing anything, in which case, again, he might as well have been the Secret Keeper himself (though I wonder if that would have meant that the Potters would have remained invisible to everyone for the rest of their lives ?) 2.2. Sirius cracks under torture and reveals that Peter is the SK. After that, all LV has to do is grab Peter, and he will obtain the Secret very easily, even if Peter is a good guy. I still fail to see how the SK switch was such a brilliant idea. Del From brianna_hp at yahoo.com Tue Nov 16 15:32:57 2004 From: brianna_hp at yahoo.com (Brianna HP) Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2004 07:32:57 -0800 (PST) Subject: Sirius's Future/Death In-Reply-To: <111620041407.23015.419A0995000E53CF000059E722058863609C9C07049D0B@comcast.net> Message-ID: <20041116153257.39908.qmail@web61305.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 118036 > Lissa: > I think there were very good reasons Sirius had to > die, most of which relate to Harry and not Sirius. > One possibility is Harry needs the fresh grief to > spur him on. Fighting Voldie isn't going to be > easy, and I think it's more believable and doable > when Voldie's taken people Harry loves- and can > remember!- from him. Harry needs to be pushed to > the edge. The other thing I keep seeing is an > alienation or removal of the adults. I mean, > Harry's parents are dead, Molly's pushing Harry away > with her overprotectiveness, Dumbledore distanced > himself, Hagrid's involved with the Order and Madame > Maxime... and the only thing that could keep Sirius > from Harry's side is death. If I'm right about the > adult thing being important, Sirius needs to die for > some reason relevant to Harry's development. Lissa, I've posted in response to your view elsewhere. I'll try and explain it again. Part of the issue for me is that people say "it's just a story." So, that means it is okay to manipulate the characters without thought or a sense of justice, never mind what it does to the reader. If as a writer though, you understand that a story is much more than the words on a page, you know that you must think of killing off a character as an act of murder. So, you better have a really good reason for doing so. Psychological development of Harry just doesn't cut it for me, and many of us. I think even JK is saying it doesn't cut it for her and that there is a plot development dependent on the veil incident. From my view of looking at this as a next generation inklings writing, I can't see where killing off Sirius fits in. I can see something miraculous coming out of it. Now, that would fit in and contribute to plot development. As a whole, I see almost every incident in these books as contributing to the forward movement of the story. Even while PoA dealt with psychology, these book are to me action driven rather than psychological. At the very least, it is a really awful story, in my opinion, that kills off a character so someone can "grow up." "brianna_hp" From iris_ft at yahoo.fr Tue Nov 16 23:30:36 2004 From: iris_ft at yahoo.fr (iris_ft) Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2004 23:30:36 -0000 Subject: The Second Prophecy (digression) In-Reply-To: <5D534028-37C0-11D9-9024-000A9577CB94@btconnect.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118037 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Barry Arrowsmith wrote: "One thing worth noticing is how the entire passage where Harry relates Sybill's burblings to DD is constructed. He reports the prophecy, carefully putting no name to "the servant of Voldemort". Then immediately he starts on about saving Peter's life and that it'll be his fault if Voldy comes back. (Harry believes the prophecy is about Peter.) DD is more laid back about the whole thing and goes so far as to state - "...predicting the future is a very difficult business indeed.... Professor Trelawney, bless her, is living proof of that." The way it's all presented on the page, almost without pause eliding from the servant of Voldy in the prophecy to saving Pettigrews life (not necessarily the same thing at all) could be a very nice piece of mis-direction, well worthy of an admitted fan of Agatha Christie. DD gives a sort of gloss to the whole episode, an "it'll all come out in the wash" pragmatism. Hmm. MAGIC DISHWASHER, I shouldn't wonder. He does give some credence to Harry's concerns, even though earlier he has stated that Sirius has not acted like an innocent man." *************************************************************** Hi, I hope you will forgive me if I don't go on with the original thread. I have no reason to discuss Kneasy's theory, though I don't really buy on the ESE!Sirius possibility. We need to keep all the doors open until we read the last book. I'd rather like to consider what Kneasy calls "the way it's all presented on the page". To tell you the truth, I don't know what to do with that "prophecy affair", because it regards the question of fate. Trelawney enounces Harry's fate through what she says about Voldemort's servant and about "the one with the power to vanquish the Dark Lord". But her voice is misty, and not only because of her intonation. In PoA, JKR spends most of the chapters showing Trelawney as a fraud, as an eccentric, and suddenly, bang, she becomes a true seer and makes a reliable prediction. That's where my problem roots: even if I consider different possibilities (like Trelawney following a scheme similar to Neville's, who turns out to be a key character though he looks so clumsy and anecdotic when we first meet him), I can't easily admit that I'm facing a true seer. And my own opinion concerning seers has nothing to do with it. I just don't manage to interpret JKR's intention. What does she want to say when she writes Trelawney? Does she want to say that seers are frauds? But in that case, why does she suddenly changes completely the orientation of the character, and makes her become the voice of Harry's fate? Does she want to say that Harry is doomed, that it is all written in the stars, or elsewhere? But why does she spend in that case so much time caricaturing the Divination lessons? There's something else; on JKR's web site, you can read that in the F.A.Q. section: Q: Do you believe in fate? A: No, I believe in hard work and luck, and that the first often leads to the second. Why would JKR use fate as a plotting device if she doesn't believe in it? Okay, you can object that when an author writes a fiction, he/she doesn't necessary need to believe what he/she writes. He/she can write sublime things though he/she is actually mean, and vice versa. He/she can even act in complete contradiction with what he/she writes, though it is sincerely written. See what happened with Jean Jacques Rousseau, who wrote so beautifully about the proper way to educate children, but happened at the same time to abandon his own kids. I'm not sure an author is entirely portrayed in what he/she writes. It's a vast debate, and I don't think I'm able to give it an answer, because it requires much more experience and knowledge than I will ever have. So back to JKR, to Trelawney, and to Harry. And, as we need something to rely on, let's trust JKR's words: she doesn't believe in fate. If we trust them, then we can consider this possibility: when she writes the prophecies, she's mis-directing us, and there's something more we don't see at first glance. That's where "the way it's all presented" happens to be important. There's an interesting thing in what Kneasy wrote: "Dumbledore gives a sort of gloss to the whole episode". Don't you find the part Dumbledore plays in that "prophecy affair" rather particular? He is the one who makes Harry and the reader believe what Trelawney said. He legitimates the two prophecies. In both cases, he's alone with Harry; there's nobody else who could make an objection to what he says, and to what the prophecies tell. Harry believes the PoA prophecy is true because Dumbledore declares that Trelawney made a real prediction: "Do you know, Harry, I think she might have been" ( ) "Who'd have thought it? That brings her total of real predictions up to two. I should offer her a pay rise " (PoA, chapter 22) Now let's have a look at the OotP prophecy, at the way it is presented. This time, Harry doesn't even hear it directly. He has to trust Dumbledore's memory. And what do you think of the circumstances in which the prophecy was made? Dumbledore says Trelawney and him were at the Hog' Head. He had gone there "to see an applicant for the post of Divination teacher". Why did he meet Trelawney at the Hog's Head? Why didn't he meet her in his office, like every head master does when he wants to talk with an applicant? We can object that it was a war time and that he probably didn't want to risk the school safety, if the applicant happened to be a spy or a Death Eater. However, he says himself some pages later that the Hog' Head "is a place where it is never safe to assume you are not being overheard". So why didn't he choose a safer place? At that time, working for Dumbledore, for Hogwarts, meant working against Voldemort. So why didn't he care more for the safety of the teacher he was about to hire? We generally tend to consider the prophecies, and only the prophecies; we barely consider "the way it's all presented". And it's all presented according to Dumbledore. He is the one who legitimates the prophecies, and who gives them their orientation. Is he able to do it because he knew them even before Trelawney pronounced their words? He says in PoA: "The consequences of our actions are always so complicated, so diverse, that predicting the future is a very difficult business, indeed " His action, the night he met with Trelawney at the Hog's Head, had one consequence: Several months later, Voldemort went after the Potter to kill their son. Was it unexpected? Or are we facing a long and patient manipulation? "I believe in hard work and luck, and that the first often leads to the second." Maybe it's only a coincidence. But it could also be what really lies behind the prophecies. I'm not meaning by this that Dumbledore is evil. I'm just supposing he's an operator, working hard, on something even more important than defeating Voldemort. Something like the transfiguration of the wizard world, with Voldemort and Harry as instruments. Will he be lucky enough to reach his goal? Just my (confused) opinion, lost among many, many others, Amicalement, Iris From Vivamus at TaprootTech.com Tue Nov 16 16:15:04 2004 From: Vivamus at TaprootTech.com (Vivamus) Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2004 11:15:04 -0500 Subject: "Conjured" food (was Re: The Nature of Galleons) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200411161115883.SM01064@DEVBOX> No: HPFGUIDX 118038 > potioncat harkened unto me: > > Q: What are the limitations on the material objects you > > can conjure up ? > > A: Something that you conjure out of thin air will not > > last. Patrick: > Though, then does the food vanish from your stomach after you eat it? > How unsatisfying! I think the food appearing is a matter of something similar to apparating. Remember the kitchen under the main dining hall has tables that mirror the hall above? Food magically goes up from the kitchen into the dining hall to appear on the tables. When McGonagall or someone else conjures up a plate of pastries and pumpkin juice, I imagine they are summoning from the kitchen, rather than conjuring ex nihilo. Just a theory, I know, but has anyone read anything to contradict that? Vivamus From annegirl11 at juno.com Tue Nov 16 23:45:43 2004 From: annegirl11 at juno.com (annegirl11 at juno.com) Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2004 18:45:43 -0500 Subject: The Trio's friendship (was: Re: [HPforGrownups] Re: OoP: Neville's Wand Message-ID: <20041116.190440.3216.2.annegirl11@juno.com> No: HPFGUIDX 118039 Kmc said: > I do not think the trio will completely disband, though certainly > the relationships within it will change. Change is what I expect, too. They're getting older, Ron and Hermione are going to pair off any day now, and I don't think the people you're BFF with when you're 11 are the only kids you hang around with your entire adolescence. I really liked the beginnings of this in OOtP, with Ron and Hermione riding in the prefects' compartment, and Harry meeting Luna and becoming closer friends with Neville. As Harry gets older, and starts participating in the war, I think it's important that he moves beyond his clique and start developing friendships with others. Especially if he starts the initiative of friendships among the houses. Hopefully, by the time the kids graduate, it'll be common for kids from different houses to be seen talking and eating together in the great hall. Aura ~*~ "What he didn't like about heroes was that they were usually suicidally gloomy when sober and homicidally insane when drunk." - Discword http://archive.skyehawke.com/authors.php?no=606 From kjones at telus.net Tue Nov 16 22:21:03 2004 From: kjones at telus.net (Kathryn Jones) Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2004 14:21:03 -0800 Subject: The Second Prophecy / the number 12 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <419A7D4F.4070500@telus.net> No: HPFGUIDX 118040 > Kneasy wrote: > > Voldy wants the Prophecy globe; how would an agent help there? By > claiming sole guardian rights over Harry. By encouraging Harry's > rashness. By influencing Harry against Snape's Occlumency. Or by > being deliberately ambiguous (or by being deliberately *not* > ambiguous) to Kreacher. Or by making sure that you'll be noticed by > Malfoy while animaging about Kings Cross against the wishes of > everybody with an ounce of sense. Passing a message? "Yes, I'm > around; yes I'm close to Harry." Useful stuff for the Voldy clique. Kathy writes: I like to vote for Sirius as well because of the second prophecy and JKR's continual use of the number 12. At the Leaky Cauldron, Percy was staying in room *#12*. Page 52 PoA. In OotP it states that Snape has been teaching for 14 years. In PoA he has therefore been teaching for *12* years. Pg. 238, the prophecy states the "servant has been chained these *12* years. Pg 267, Ron says that Scabbers has been in his family for years. Lupin answers "*Twelve* years, in fact" On pg 270, Peter says that he has been waiting for Sirius to come after him for *12* years. On the same page, Sirius repeats it when he says "You haven't been hiding from me for *12* years." On the same page, Lupin has difficulty understanding why an innocent man would live as a rat for *12* years. On page 271, Black states that Voldemort has been in hiding for *12* years. Mr. Weasley stated on the same page that Sirius had had *12* years alone in Azkaban. The prediction stated "tonight...*before midnight.*..the servant...will set out...to rejoin...his master..." When Dumbledore locks the door to the hospital wing, he specifically gives the time of "** *five minutes to midnight*", on page 288. As Sirius would have escaped on Buckbeak by then, it fits with the prophecy. No time is given for Peter's escape other than logically speaking, it was well before midnight. On page 305, Dumbledore again repeats that it is *five minutes to midnight* as he prepares to lock the door for the second time. On page 54, it mentions that *Fudge*, who is more than a little suspicious, went to Azkaban the night Sirius escaped. On page 266, Sirius describes how *Fudge* gave him the newspaper with the picture of Peter in it as a rat. I wonder if Fudge visited *all *of the Azkaban prisoners. Doesn't seem likely. I believe that Peter may well be the same kind of red herring that Snape was in the first book. It doesn't seem to me that Peter is cast in stone as "the spy". There is too much repitition here to just disregard it. Also, in OotP, Sirius was hit with a red flash, which would appear to be a stunning spell, by Bellatrix. This seems to be a rather harmless sort of spell for a DE be using to disable a member of the Order. It will be interesting to find out. KJ From willsonkmom at msn.com Wed Nov 17 00:08:50 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2004 00:08:50 -0000 Subject: "Conjured" food (was Re: The Nature of Galleons) In-Reply-To: <200411161115883.SM01064@DEVBOX> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118041 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Vivamus" wrote: > > > potioncat harkened unto me: > > > Q: What are the limitations on the material objects you > > > can conjure up ? > > > A: Something that you conjure out of thin air will not > > > last. > > Patrick: > > Though, then does the food vanish from your stomach after you eat it? > > How unsatisfying! > > vivamus > I think the food appearing is a matter of something similar to apparating. > Remember the kitchen under the main dining hall has tables that mirror the > hall above? Food magically goes up from the kitchen into the dining hall > to appear on the tables. > > When McGonagall or someone else conjures up a plate of pastries and pumpkin > juice, I imagine they are summoning from the kitchen, rather than conjuring > ex nihilo. > > Just a theory, I know, but has anyone read anything to contradict that? > Potioncat: We don't know. Nor do we know what JKR intends when it comes to food. I think the sandwiches that McGonagall magicked were from the kitchen. And we were told that the plate kept refilling itself. I'll bet it wasn't the first time a student(s) had to eat sandwiches by himself/themselves while everyone else had a feast. As for the sauce that sprayed from Molly's wand (sounding less and less appitizing as I think about it) she may have summoned it from somewhere else...the ultimate carry out, or it may have been conjured. I wonder how parents teach kids the day to day magic if magic isn't allowed over the holidays? "Gee, Mum, I'd help with the dishes, but it's against the rules." "Hey, Mum, would you do my laundry? I'm not allowed you know." Potioncat (who would have a word or two with DD about that underage magic rule!!) From sophierom at yahoo.com Wed Nov 17 00:10:19 2004 From: sophierom at yahoo.com (sophierom) Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2004 00:10:19 -0000 Subject: Plot in OotP In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118042 > > Hickengruendler: > However, a good plot isn't only about a possible twist. I > think OotP was a very well plotted book, with one incident > consequently leading to another. > > For example: Because Fudge doesn't believe Harry, Umbridge is > appointed High Inquisitor. Because Umbridge is appointed High > Inquisitor, she sacks Trelawney. Because Trelawney is sacked and > Dumbledore wants her to stay, he hires Firenze. Because Firenze is > hired, the centaurs get angry. Because the centaurs were offended, > Hermione finally developed a plan to get rid of Umbridge, thus > closing the circle. > > Another example: Because Umbridge refuses to teach them proper DADA, > the kids grounded the DA. Because of the DA, Dumbledore in the end > had to leave Hogwarts. Because Dumbledore left Hogwarts, Harry > couldn't go to him for help after his dream about Sirius. Because of > this (and some other things, like Snape stopping to teach Harry > Occlumency), Harry and his friends had to go to the DoM themselves > and actually had to use, what they learnt. Sophierom: Nice point. I'd add another plot "loop" to your list here. Because Dumbledore knows LV has access to Harry's mind, he asks Snape to teach Harry Occlumency. Because Snape teaches Harry Occlumency, Harry has access to Snape's memories via the Pensieve. Because Harry looks into the Pensieve, Snape throws him out of the office. Because of this row, Harry never finishes his lessons. Because of this, Voldemort is able to continue feeding Harry false images.... and so on. I never really thought about the flow of the plot in these terms before, but it's a fun little game to connect the dots! > > Another poster criticized, that nothing really changed at the end of > OotP. That's not really true. The main conflict in OotP was not > between Harry and Voldemort, but between the Harry (and his > supporters) and the ministry. Sophierom: I think the conflict between Harry and the Ministry was ONE of the major conflicts, but not THE major one. A big conflict in this book turned out to be between Harry and Dumbledore. Maybe I'm exaggerating or misstating their relationship. But it seems to me that from the very beginning of OotP, when Harry is lying in his relatives' flower bed to hear the news, to the very end, when finally Dumbledore tells Harry the prophecy, there is a conflict between what Dumbledore wants Harry to know and what Harry wants (and needs?) to know. By the end of OotP, it seems that Dumbledore has come to realize that keeping Harry completely in the dark is no longer an option. This is not to say that he's going to make Harry a full-fledged member of the Order, or that harry will become his confidante. But I think, by admitting he was wrong to keep the prophecy from Harry, Dumbledore has signaled a huge change that occurred in OotP. Harry (as well as the readers) can no longer mistake Dumbledore for an omniscient, infallible man. From jlnbtr at yahoo.com Tue Nov 16 23:37:30 2004 From: jlnbtr at yahoo.com (Juli) Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2004 15:37:30 -0800 (PST) Subject: DD admits he's an animagus Message-ID: <20041116233730.89896.qmail@web53102.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 118043 --- johnbowman19 wrote: > He [Dumbledore] says "I have absolutely no intention of > being sent to Azkaban. I could break out of course-- but > what a waste of time, and frankly, I can think of a whole > host of things I would rather be doing". Maybe he is both an animagus and methamorphmagus, I mean he is DD, he's the man, the puppet-master of the WW, the most powerful wizard, so sure he could also be an unregistered animagus, just like the Marauders, but there's a third option: he is neither, he's just so powerful he can escape the Dementors (wait, was this scene before or after the 5 DEs escaped and the dementors quitted?) without using a wand. But, if it was after the dementors left Azkaban, how easy would it be for him to just leave. Juli - thinkig what secret powers DD may have From bob.oliver at cox.net Tue Nov 16 23:49:02 2004 From: bob.oliver at cox.net (lupinlore) Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2004 23:49:02 -0000 Subject: Founders as Wizarding Government In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118044 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Hester Griffith" wrote: > > SS pg. 63: "I haven't got any money - and you heard Uncle > Vernon last night... he won't pay for me to go and learn magic." > SS pg. 75: Hagrid helped Harry pile some of it into a bag. > "...Right, that should be enough fer a couple o' terms, we'll > keep the rest safe for yeh." > > I always read this as meaning Harry took enough to pay tuition, buy > books for a few years, and have extra spending money. But are we sure this was for tuition? I always read it as meaning the money was for his supplies. But I could be wrong. Lupinlore From mgrantwich at yahoo.com Wed Nov 17 01:40:50 2004 From: mgrantwich at yahoo.com (Magda Grantwich) Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2004 17:40:50 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: The Second Prophecy plus a correction In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041117014050.16659.qmail@web53108.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 118045 > Bookworm: > That said, the way Sirius is portrayed encouraging Harry to take > risks in OoP is so opposite from his cautiousness in GoF there > seems to be a disconnect somewhere. > I find it quite believable, actually. I think Sirius was one of those guys who needed action, for whom stationary repose was sheer torture and who could handle the stress of dangerous situations while being on the run from the authorities. 95% of the population would find such danger impossible to deal with but he could handle it. Had he been a muggle in a major RL war, his men would have adored him because of his gallant bravery and his overall panache. But after the war was over and they went home to get jobs, get married and have babies, he would have been miserable because the excitement was gone. Had Sirius actually been allowed out during OOTP, he would have been mentally healthier for the challenge of successfully eluding both DE's and MoM Aurors (and as much as I dislike his character, there's no doubt in my mind that he would have successfully eluded anyone trying to catch him). Magda __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? The all-new My Yahoo! - Get yours free! http://my.yahoo.com From heos at virgilio.it Wed Nov 17 00:41:42 2004 From: heos at virgilio.it (chrusotoxos) Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2004 00:41:42 -0000 Subject: SNAPE the coward? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118046 Hi...thinking again and again about whose side is Snape on, and what the hell he's doing now...so here is my guess... Premise: Snape's the one for whom I keep reading, but I don't like him, I think he's a horrible person, even if he's on the good side (I'm convinced of that). I was highly intrigued about that sentence in the graveyard...giving away so much, and giving away nothing at the same time... At first, I took it as it is, i.e. Karkaroff=coward, Snape=traitor, Crouch jr=faithful. But then it seemed too simple, and when I saw Snape acting as a spy again in OotP I re-read that passage - I mean, how could Snape get back to Voldemort without being killed? My guess is that JKR voluntarily misled us into considering Karkaroff as a coward, and therefore 'the coward'. She described him as a coward so many times only to be sure that when we'd see the word 'coward' again we'd have a Pavlovian thing and bark: 'Karkaroff'! But what if Voldemort sees SNAPE as the coward, and Karkaroff as the traitor? After all, Karkaroff has betrayed to get his freedom, whereas we don't have any evidence about Snape doing an overt betrayal. Dumbledore was witness for him, and that implies that Snape gave away nothing and that Dumbledore trusted him basing himself on something that nobody else knew...and couldn't the other DE see him as a coward? Hiding in a school, doing nothing useful, when the Lestranges are risking their lives and Malfoy is keeping his reputation as strong as ever, a weapon for the second war...if Snape is the coward, it all fits: he must know that he will be heavily punished, and that's why he's pale at the end of GoF, why Dumbledore is concerned about him. He must have been violently tortured, either that night or during the summer, while Harry was sulking on park benches... And a coward, someone submitted to others, is also as grownups people see him, as strange as it may seem to Harry: Sirius accuses him to be Lucius' dog, Moody orders him around, Dumbledore assumed that he will be right where he wants him... Our poor potions master has not so much authority as we're imagining... Let me know what you think about all that! bye, chrusotoxos From jlnbtr at yahoo.com Wed Nov 17 01:04:57 2004 From: jlnbtr at yahoo.com (Juli) Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2004 17:04:57 -0800 (PST) Subject: Tuition (was Re: Founders as Wizarding Government) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041117010457.94775.qmail@web53108.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 118047 > > Hester Griffith: > > SS pg. 63: "I haven't got any money - and you > > heard Uncle Vernon last night... he won't pay > > for me to go and learn magic." > > > > I always read this as meaning Harry took enough > > to pay tuition, buy books for a few years, and > > have extra spending money. > > Lupinlore: > But are we sure this was for tuition? I always read > it as meaning the money was for his supplies. But I > could be wrong. I think Hogwarts works like a semi-private school, you pay according to your income, the Wealeys pay less than the Malfoys for example. Harry because he's got more than enough money would pay full fare. Maybe this is why Malfoy acts as if he owns the school (I know it could also be because his father was in the board). Juli From easimm at yahoo.com Wed Nov 17 01:51:05 2004 From: easimm at yahoo.com (curlyhornedsnorkack) Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2004 01:51:05 -0000 Subject: The length of the Pensieve Scene In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118048 > curlyhornedsnorkack wrote : > "What Snape was doing during the scenes before he was spotted by the > Marauders was not innocent and harmless; he was being a sneak." > > Del replies : > ...So can you back your > allegations with canon ? Yes. There are some staightforward tidbits. -In the scene, the sun is shining. Lots of people are going out to enjoy the great outdoors. The Marauders choose the shade of a beech tree, which allows quite a bit of sun through the leaves. Snape chooses the "dense shadow of a clump of bushes". If you prefer dense shadow, the best place to stay is indoors. -When Snape is in the dense shade, Harry isn't studying Snape to see whether he is really looking at the exam questions, so we can't see what he's doing. But when Snape's nickname is called, Harry thinks that Snape looks like he has been expecting an attack. Other clues depend a lot on what one believes to be true about the pensieve. First off, it seems clear from discussions on the pensieve that we can't really pin down how the pensive works; I think it enhances memories; it doesn't create new ones. For example, In DD's memories from the pensieve in GOF, the details seem related to a train of thought. In Harry's first peak into the pensieve(GOF),when Harry sees the "Judgement" Room, all details enhance the somberness of the trials. In the memory with the Celebrity Leo Bagman, Rita Skeeter in all her glory makes an appearance, but she would be expected to be present in a celebrity trial. In DD's memories of Bertha Jorkins and Sybill Trelawney (OOTP), Harry only sees their bodies, not their surroundings. So it seems likely that the pensieve works by fleshing out the details that makes a memory more real- not by creating extra scenes. -If Snape is so engrossed in his exam questions, he could not incorporate into his memory words he couldn't hear. He would be too busy to have any awareness of whole discussions. But Snape manages to incorporate into his memory a discussion that is heard behind another group of people. In comparison, as far as we can tell, Harry only hears undistinguished chattering and laughing from the girls nearby. (I wonder whether Snape had a version of extendable ears.) -Snape and the Marauders are about Harry's age in the scene, so, assuming that Snape and the Marauders started in the same year, they have had time to get to know each other pretty well. Lupin tells Harry later that James and Snape have hated each other from the start. Yet Snape just happens to stay close enough to his enemies to hear the conversation, and, when they stride off across a lawn (I think we can assume there is no path) he happens to go in the same direction. Finally, we have to examine Snape's reasons for hiding such a long memory from Harry. If Snape doesn't care about the early part of the memory, why would he hide it from Harry? Perhaps hiding his snooping ways from Harry was important to Snape. It's interesting to me that in this case Snape would not realize that Harry is more interested in watching his father and his friends interact than watching Snape snoop. Anyway, Snape's actions seem pretty suspicious to me. curlyhornedsnorkack From ccaracciolo at nyc.rr.com Wed Nov 17 01:53:12 2004 From: ccaracciolo at nyc.rr.com (carolcaracciolo) Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2004 01:53:12 -0000 Subject: Plot in OotP In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118049 > Hickengruendler: > > In a few recent posts, I read the opinion by some posters, that OotP > has let Plot than the previous books. I > think OotP was a very well plotted book, with one incident > consequently leading to another. Now Carol says: My biggest gripe with OOTP was not necessarily that JKR had left dots unconnected but with the WAY she connected them. The dialogue, in many spots, seemed stilted, awkward and, as Aura so aptly put it, "soapy." It just didn't feel like JKR was as "in touch" with her characters as she was in previous novels. Like I said in my previous post, the novel feels like a foggy memory. The writing was not NEARLY as compelling as her previous work. The device of "the near-miss" death scenes added a cheesy-ness (is that a word?) that I would NEVER dream of attributing to JKR. I was left feeling disappointed with what I viewed as a lack of craftsmanship. Maybe more time and another re-write would have helped? Does JKR work with the same editor for each book? I really hope HBP hits the high notes that GoF did... Carol Now feeling very dejected...and wanting to re-read GoF in the worst way! From ginnysthe1 at yahoo.com Wed Nov 17 02:07:36 2004 From: ginnysthe1 at yahoo.com (ginnysthe1) Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2004 02:07:36 -0000 Subject: DD admits he's an animagus In-Reply-To: <20041116233730.89896.qmail@web53102.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118050 John wrote: > He [Dumbledore] says "I have absolutely no intention of being sent to Azkaban. I could break out of course-- but what a waste of time, and frankly, I can think of a whole host of things I would rather be doing".< Juli replied: >Maybe he is both an animagus and methamorphmagus, I mean he is DD, he's the man, the puppet-master of the WW, the most powerful wizard, so sure he could also be an unregistered animagus, just like the Marauders, but there's a third option: he is neither, he's just so powerful he can escape the Dementors (wait, was this scene before or after the 5 DEs escaped and the dementors quitted?) without using a wand. But, if it was after the dementors left Azkaban, how easy would it be for him to just leave.< Kim now: I really went for John's theory of animagus ability because I've been pushing for it too (like Patrick(?), et al.) No doubt DD would be able to do many other things to aid his escape from Azkaban, but DD having animagus ability is just so obvious and beautiful an idea to me (and such an unexamined but likely aspect of DD's talent, so IMO JKR has been keeping it a secret up til now for some reason). However, IIRC, the only time the animagus register was mentioned was when Hermione looked at it and didn't find the Marauders on it (though she did find McGonagall). But she said she'd looked at the register only for the last 100 years, didn't she? That may mean that DD is actually on the animagus register, but since he's 150 years old, he may be on the register from the *previous* century, and Hermione didn't look at that one! Regards, Kim From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Wed Nov 17 02:16:03 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2004 02:16:03 -0000 Subject: Prophecies and fate; writing what you don't believe (was:The Second Prophecy) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118051 Iris: > I just don't manage to interpret JKR's intention. What does she > want to say when she writes Trelawney? Does she want to say that > seers are frauds? But in that case, why does she suddenly changes > completely the orientation of the character, and makes her become > the voice of Harry's fate? Does she want to say that Harry is > doomed, that it is all written in the stars, or elsewhere? But why > does she spend in that case so much time caricaturing the > Divination lessons? > > There's something else; on JKR's web site, you can read that in > the F.A.Q. section: > Q: Do you believe in fate? > A: No, I believe in hard work and luck, and that the first often > leads to the second. > > Why would JKR use fate as a plotting device if she doesn't believe > in it? > Okay, you can object that when an author writes a fiction, he/she > doesn't necessary need to believe what he/she writes. > So back to JKR, to Trelawney, and to Harry. > > And, as we need something to rely on, let's trust JKR's words: she > doesn't believe in fate. > If we trust them, then we can consider this possibility: when she > writes the prophecies, she's mis-directing us, and there's > something more we don't see at first glance. > That's where "the way it's all presented" happens to be important. > > Don't you find the part Dumbledore plays in that "prophecy affair" > rather particular? > I'm not meaning by this that Dumbledore is evil. I'm just > supposing he's an operator, working hard, on something even more > important than defeating Voldemort. Something like the > transfiguration of the wizard world, with Voldemort and Harry as > instruments. Will he be lucky enough to reach his goal? SSSusan: I am intrigued by these questions, Iris. I have also wondered about her stating so forthrightly that she does not believe in fate and yet utilizing prophecies as such central features in the story. DOES her not believing in fate tell us something about what we should expect to discover about the "truth" of these prophecies before we're through? OTOH, JKR is also on record as saying she doesn't believe in magic. Yet magic is one of the cornerstones -- if not THE cornerstone -- of the world she's chosen to write about. What does that mean? If anything? Or does it play right into your final statement, Iris, about the possibility that DD's goal is the transfiguration of the WW? Siriusly Snapey Susan From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Wed Nov 17 02:25:21 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2004 02:25:21 -0000 Subject: Plot in OotP In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118052 > Now Carol says: > > My biggest gripe with OOTP was not necessarily that JKR had left > dots unconnected but with the WAY she connected them. snip. Alla: It is indeed amasing how differently we read the books. I think that one of the reasons why quite a few readers were dissapointed is because OOP does not stand up "on its own" so to speak as much as the others did. At least in the first four books the villain is uncovered more or less at the end despite the fact that we still large mystery to uncover and larger adventure to relive. The reader is given more or less satisfactory conclusion. There is no satisfactory conclusion , IMO, in OOP . Harry is left with the huge burden, Sirius is dead or supposedly dead (as I believe), Dumbledore from supposedly all powerful mento turned out to be old man, who made many many mistakes and despite his desire to help Harry, hurt him in all ways possible (of course all those are my conclusions and mine only) JKR stated that OOP should be read more or less as the first part of the final trilogy of the series and that sixth and seventh books will be even tighter connected together. I reserve judgment on how well she plotted the final trilogy, untill I read the last book. I don't think we know how all dots are connected yet. As the "beginning of the end", I am VERY satisfied with OOP. I find Harry's transition from the boy to angry teenager very believable, I also think that dark atmosphere suited the book really well. From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Wed Nov 17 02:50:32 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2004 02:50:32 -0000 Subject: The Second Prophecy In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118053 > Neri: snip. > Of course, the solution to this small problem is obvious: There must > be TWO people named Sirius in the HP saga, and JKR was referring to > the other Sirius in this quote. > > Generally speaking, it would be very efficient to assume that there > are two characters answering to each name in the WW, and one of them > is on the good side while the other is on the dark side. This would > enable JKR to say anything to us without (heaven forbid!) lying. > Alla: Yes, yes, yes. This IS the best solution to many of our discussions. Since I am one of those dull list members,who believes that Love and ability to love is indeed a great redeeming quality of the "potterverse" characters, I don't believe that THAT Sirius is ESE!, so let his double be ESE! Now, who else? Oh, yes. Lupin, of course. Pippin had been suggesting THAT for ages :o) Whom else do we have? Oh, Dumbledore. Of course there are two of them. One of them is wise and old wisard, who is tries his best to win this war, loves Harry, but makes mistakes, because he loves too much. Another is a Puppetmaster!Dumbledore, who is ruthless manipulator and knows no compassion or pity whatsoever. Olivier already described two Harrys. Neri, thank you for the laugh. From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Wed Nov 17 03:04:56 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2004 03:04:56 -0000 Subject: Prophecies and fate; writing what you don't believe (was:The Second Prophecy) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118054 > SSSusan: > I am intrigued by these questions, Iris. I have also wondered about > her stating so forthrightly that she does not believe in fate and > yet utilizing prophecies as such central features in the story. > DOES her not believing in fate tell us something about what we > should expect to discover about the "truth" of these prophecies > before we're through? Alla: Do you know what I think? I said it before, so you probably do. I don't believe that prophecy will come out as Dumbledore expects. I think the solution will be different and unexpected. I do think that the prohecy itsel was thrown at us as the biggest "red herring", partially ebcause this literary device is so overused, IMO. And yes, I think it is very significant that JKR does not believe in fate. SSSsusan: > OTOH, JKR is also on record as saying she doesn't believe in magic. > Yet magic is one of the cornerstones -- if not THE cornerstone -- of > the world she's chosen to write about. What does that mean? If > anything? Alla: I think she keeps saying THAT to calm down the people, who claim that her books teach witchcraft. I don't see the significance of this statement to the plot, but of course I could be wrong. SSSsusan: > Or does it play right into your final statement, Iris, about the > possibility that DD's goal is the transfiguration of the WW? > Alla: This one I like very much. From snow15145 at yahoo.com Wed Nov 17 04:43:20 2004 From: snow15145 at yahoo.com (snow15145) Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2004 04:43:20 -0000 Subject: Who knows? DD knows, that's who. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118055 Carolyn: Snip: For a start, it appears that the keeper must know what the prophecies contain, otherwise how could he have re-labelled the orb ? If he doesn't, and was only acting on instructions, who told him to re-label? Dumbledore? How convenient. And what a great job. Snooping around all those shelves with a duster, pursing your lips over so-and-so prophecy: `ha..they won't like it when their number comes up wonder if he's still alive that was a crap seer, always gets things wrong .serve `em right ' Bet the Keeper gets bought a few lunches. But does it stop at a nod and a wink? Worryingly, of the four people we have had identified as working in the Department of Mysteries (Bode, Croaker, Rookwood, Avery), two are DEs, and a third was easily Imperioed, then murdered. The fourth is unpromisingly called 'Croaker' ? who's he destined to talk to? Snow: Where do I begin Great Post! I especially love the political referencing to the lobbying tactics of let's have lunch! As to Croaker being the last of the four to croak, my first response was to croak or fess up about what he knows but after reading Kneasy's response to croak, as in dead, I'm not quite sure, could be either. Carolyn: But, intriguingly, neither Rookwood nor Avery felt inclined to tell their master what went on at the Department before they ended up in Azkaban all those years ago. Why not? It would have saved Voldie a lot of grief if he'd been able to hear the prophecy in its entirety before GH, but from the evidence of Harry's dreams, Voldemort did not even have a clear mental picture of what the Department of Mysteries looked like until they explained it to him 16 years later (Ch 26, OOP). Even then, Avery got some crucial facts wrong, and delayed Voldemort's plans by many months. Snow: Very nice approach never thought about it that way. So which side were the aurors really on? How many people are on the Dumbledore silent, double agent, squad? Carolyn: What does the Department of Mysteries do anyway? FB&WTFT mentions that, unlike the other six departments at the MoM, it is possibly not answerable to the Department of Magical Law Enforcement (the largest department at the Ministry, under Fudge's direct control). So, who does it answer to? Effectively, it's a secret intelligence service, pursuing its own agenda, collecting prophecies about future events from around the WW. Who is on the circulation list for the analysis reports? Probably not Fudge. A security risk if there ever was one. Bet he's only been cleared for need-to-know, deniable information. But Dumbledore? Probably acts as a specialist advisor, even though he's not formally on the staff. Snow: Nor is Dumbledore Ministry Head but when Fudge, who `is', appears at the end of OOP, Dumbledore doesn't hesitate to suggest nor hesitate to tell Fudge exactly what 'he' will do. Who is running the show again? Oh yeah him! Carolyn: It is probably more useful to view the Possession incident rather as > a lab test, where DD is checking a hypothesis about the way Harry and > Voldemort are likely to interact. > > Look at the calm way he says 'Are you all right?' to Harry, after > the boy has experienced the equivalent of the electric chair. After > pulling Harry to his feet, there's not even a brief hug, or manly > clap on the shoulder. An 'apparently satisfied' DD moves on promptly > to dealing with Fudge. It's a pretty clinical reaction. The outcome > of an experiment had been correctly predicted; the subject had > responded as expected. Snow: Can I say again excellent post! Mastermind Dumbledore has assumed the reaction and response to a calculated and predestined end. Carolyn: > In fact when you think about it, isn't Dumbledore doing rather too > well? Effortlessly, it seems he's a step ahead all the time. Sitting > up there in his office, sucking sherbet lemons. He's been proved > right about Voldie and as a result, can kick ass at the Ministry. > They've only lost Sirius so far, who was a liability anyway. The > kid's a bit upset, granted, but, hey, welcome to the real world; he > needs to grow up. Various key players are all in position ? the rat, > Snape. He has a good idea who might try to betray him, or be unequal > to their task. Snow: But Dumbledore will still equate that everyone has their choices. (Don't let the cat out of the bag about Mr. and Mrs. Longbottom Harry until Neville is ready to tell you.) It is about everyone's choices (and of course I've steered you through to the appropriate course) and we mustn't influence those choices by telling the truth to anyone because why they can't handle the truth at least not until they are ready. Carolyn: Voldy, by contrast, is on his knees. None of his best curses work on the brat, his wand's about as much use as stick of celery, and even his trademark speciality, Possession, has left him with some nasty burn marks all over his nice new hands. Most of his top team are (temporarily) banged up in Azkaban; he's trapped in a cave somewhere having to listen to the ravings of lunatic Bella, and he also still doesn't know what's in the prophecy, dammit. The only people he can rely on are the Dementors, and frankly they are not great company. Snow: Aha! Spinners End! the back-story to Voldy. Trapped in a cave with Bella who is begging that it isn't so that he is part part muggle! Say it isn't so Voldy my master. Yes, Bella it is! The truth is out of my horrid heritage but my grandfather was Marvalo who was a descendant of Salizar Slytherin. Carolyn: But are we so very sure that we understand what Dumbledore is up to ? People are fond of insisting that `he's the epitome of goodness', as though no further explanation is required. Hm. By that is meant, perhaps, a person adhering to higher moral values, who always tries to do the right thing? Who wouldn't be satisfied with just killing Tom Riddle and knows there are things much worse than death ? That sort of stuff can go to your head, you know, understanding so clearly what is right and what is wrong, especially when there are few people to argue with you. Snow: To know, or counter, your enemy you must first enter their domain, (scary) what they are possibly thinking. In Dumbledore's world, he already realizes Voldy's capabilities because he knows his pragmatics. Dumbledore has been forewarned of Voldy's existence since he was born the young Tom Riddle by the magical quill. Carolyn: Who thinks Kneasy is a bad influence Snow: Isn't it the truth! God bless him! From foxmoth at qnet.com Wed Nov 17 04:57:50 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2004 04:57:50 -0000 Subject: Sirius's Future/Death In-Reply-To: <20041116153257.39908.qmail@web61305.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118056 Brianna: > Part of the issue for me is that people say "it's just > a story." So, that means it is okay to manipulate the > characters without thought or a sense of justice, > never mind what it does to the reader. > > If as a writer though, you understand that a story is > much more than the words on a page, you know that you > must think of killing off a character as an act of > murder. So, you better have a really good reason for > doing so. Psychological development of Harry just > doesn't cut it for me, and many of us. I think even JK > is saying it doesn't cut it for her and that there is > a plot development dependent on the veil incident. > > From my view of looking at this as a next generation > inklings writing, I can't see where killing off > Sirius fits in. I can see something miraculous coming > out of it. Now, that would fit in and contribute to > plot development. Pippin: Sirius was a mortal, not an angelic figure like Gandalf. I suppose Boromir's death must have seemed just as senseless to Pippin (LotR Pippin, that is, not me.) Pippin never knew that Boromir had anything to repent of. Besides, even Frodo wouldn't have said that Boromir deserved it, though Boromir also did not act like an innocent man. But it was to give Boromir's death some meaning that Pippin eventually swore allegiance to Denethor, and because of that, Faramir was saved...so Boromir's death wasn't useless after all. I could see Harry having the courage to give up something that really matters, like magic itself, so that Sirius will not have died in vain. Pippin always happy to tie Potter to LOTR From jlnbtr at yahoo.com Wed Nov 17 02:27:36 2004 From: jlnbtr at yahoo.com (Juli) Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2004 18:27:36 -0800 (PST) Subject: DD admits he's an animagus In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041117022736.88205.qmail@web53110.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 118057 > Kim wrote: > the only time the animagus register was mentioned was > when Hermione looked at it and didn't find the Marauders > on it (though she did find McGonagall). But she said > she'd looked at the register only for the last 100 years, > didn't she? That may mean that DD is actually on the > animagus register, but since he's 150 years old, he may > be on the register from the *previous* century, and > Hermione didn't look at that one! Juli again: Nice theory, that could be the reason nobody knows Dumbledore's an animagus, he's one the oldest in the WW, what if Professor Marchbanks knows he's an animagus, and that's why in OoP she says "The MoM will never find DD if he doesn't want to be found?" (sorry, not exact quote), not only saying that he can fool the whole MoM, but since he's an animagus, and not many know it, there's no way he'll be found. Maybe he's a bumblebee just like so many have thought. Juli From ccaracciolo at nyc.rr.com Wed Nov 17 02:34:17 2004 From: ccaracciolo at nyc.rr.com (carolcaracciolo) Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2004 02:34:17 -0000 Subject: The Trio's friendship (was: Re: OoP: Neville's Wand) In-Reply-To: <20041116.190440.3216.2.annegirl11@juno.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118058 > Kmc said: > > I do not think the trio will completely disband, though > > certainly the relationships within it will change. > > Aura said: > Change is what I expect, too. As Harry gets older, and starts > participating in the war, I think it's important that he moves > beyond his clique and start developing friendships with others. Carol says: I believe that Harry will move away from Ron and Hermione as we progress through the novels. Why? Because, IMHO, the Trio was created as an amalgam protagonist. Harry as a stand-alone character was incomplete and needed the additional character elements that Ron and Hermione provided. It's similar to the Wizard of Oz...one character could not possibly contain all the elements that the four separate characters represent and still be believable. This idea is very eloquently outlined by Frank Clarke's essary "Hamlet=Star Wars: Exploring the Amalgam Protagonist" on englishscholar.com when he states "The amalgam-protagonist concept allows the audience to identify more closely with at least part of the hero. By limiting the number of characteristics given any one member, each part becomes more human, yet the sum remains superhuman." Now...why do I think they will start to move apart? Harry has had five novels to create a history for himself and justify characteristics that would have seemed cartoonish to assign him in the beginning. I would love to see someone take on the major points of Joseph Campbell's archetypical hero and apply them to HP. Any takers? Did I tell you how much I love this group? Carol From hickengruendler at yahoo.de Wed Nov 17 05:26:19 2004 From: hickengruendler at yahoo.de (hickengruendler) Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2004 05:26:19 -0000 Subject: Prophecies and fate; writing what you don't believe (was:The Second Prophecy) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118059 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "dumbledore11214" wrote: > Alla: > > > Do you know what I think? I said it before, so you probably do. I > don't believe that prophecy will come out as Dumbledore expects. > > I think the solution will be different and unexpected. I do think > that the prohecy itsel was thrown at us as the biggest "red > herring", partially ebcause this literary device is so overused, IMO. > Hickengruendler: That is what I think, too, for two reasons. The first reason is, that she said she worded the prophecy very carefully, which to me highly suggests that the meaning is not quite as obvious as it wseems to be. But there's also a clear hint in the book, IMO. Firenze says in his lesson basically, that the abilities of the humans to read the future are limited and that they often interprete the signs wrongly. I do not think it's by accident that JKR put this in the book, which in his end had a prophecy whose content seemed to be a bit obvious (at least for us readers. I disagree with the fans who think, that Harry shouldn't be surprised). However, I must admit that I don't really know which part of the prophecy is the one whose interpretation will turn out to be wrong. Trelawney clearly said, that one has to kill the other in the end, therefore I don't really see any loophole in this part of the prophecy. Of course there's still Neville, for whose part in the prophecy I see two possible solutions (except for the fact, that Voldemort chose his enemy). Either he really is the chosen one, and Harry's scar is not the mark Trelawney meant, but instead it is Neville who has the important mark, which might be a psychological one. This fits with Madam Pomfrey's statement, that thoughts can leave deeper scard than everything else. Or Neville is just a red-herring, and JKR put him in obvious sight, because she knew (or hoped) that the fans would discuss his part and therefore ignore the really important part of the prophecy. Hickengruendler From bob.oliver at cox.net Wed Nov 17 03:32:43 2004 From: bob.oliver at cox.net (lupinlore) Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2004 03:32:43 -0000 Subject: Plot in OotP In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118060 Alla wrote: > JKR stated that OOP should be read more or less as the first part > of the final trilogy of the series and that sixth and seventh books > will be even tighter connected together. I reserve judgment on how > well she plotted the final trilogy, untill I read the last book. I > don't think we know how all dots are connected yet. > > As the "beginning of the end", I am VERY satisfied with OOP. I find > Harry's transition from the boy to angry teenager very believable, > I also think that dark atmosphere suited the book really well. I think, Alla, that many of us simply don't have much confidence that JKR *will* continue on to connect the dots. Lets face it, her record for coherence of plot points isn't always very good. Dumbledore supposedly loves Harry but leaves him to be abused by the Dursleys and Snape. Sirius manages to spend twelve years in Azkaban despite the existance of both Veritaserum and Legilemency. The supposed fearful Dark Wizards seem to forget the Unforgiveables in their battle with a bunch of teenagers. The Ministry is so poorly guarded a bunch of teenagers evades the security in the most secure area, the Department of Mysteries. The list goes on and on. Therefore we have the deep sinking feeling that a lot of the plot points and themes brought up in OOTP will never be followed up. The DA will probably appear in the future, but Umbridge and her attempted murder may never be mentioned again. Harry may be allowed a couple of pages to mourn Sirius and then all of the complicated emotional and moral questions arising in the wake of Sirius' death, including those concerning Harry and Dumbledore's relationship, might well get swept under the rug. The issue of Snape's behavior will not be addressed believably, but instead some contrived plot point (i.e. "I trust Severus Snape") will be used so that Snape can continue to act the same with no consequences. The questions about Harry's emotions and the damage inflicted by the Dursleys and others will be allowed to lapse. That is the fear that many have about OOTP. That instead of providing the introduction of important and interesting themes that will be followed closely and brought to a conclusion, it will in the end be just a collection of briefly mentioned topics that get brushed aside and never again acknowledged or explored, or else will be dealt with in ways that are simplistic and contrived. Lupinlore From heos at virgilio.it Tue Nov 16 22:09:01 2004 From: heos at virgilio.it (chrusotoxos) Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2004 22:09:01 -0000 Subject: The Second Prophecy plus a correction In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118061 Wh-what are you people THINKING about??! *splutters* Ok, for a book having nice jolts and fake clues, but I really think that here we're going out of HP and into Stephen King... *rolls her eyes* I really can't believe that someone out there is distrusting Sirius...I mean, I'm not in love with him, dead or not. I think he's handsome, brilliant and ironical, but godamn arrogant and immature. But he's on the good side. Was. The first prophecy was misleading, because we all thought it was made about Black, and it was about Pettigrew. That's all. And the second it's not too clear, Dumbledore was really amibuous about Neville... Back to Sirius: he's been acting rashly and forcing Harry to take risks just because he's a kid himself. He's spent too much time in prison to be ever normal again. As for Lupin (we call him that because he's been a teacher for the trio...) killing him, are you mad? Dumbledore didn't want him dead in the first place, he 'believes in second chances', he surely thought, as he did for Snape, that the past can be fought and beaten. Whereas... Dumbledore trusted Sirius. And if we can't trust Dumbledore, we can't trust anyone... Don't you agree? "chrusotoxos" From finwitch at yahoo.com Wed Nov 17 08:17:59 2004 From: finwitch at yahoo.com (finwitch) Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2004 08:17:59 -0000 Subject: "Conjured" food (was Re: The Nature of Galleons) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118062 > Potioncat: > We don't know. Nor do we know what JKR intends when it comes to > food. I think the sandwiches that McGonagall magicked were from the > kitchen. And we were told that the plate kept refilling itself. > I'll bet it wasn't the first time a student(s) had to eat sandwiches > by himself/themselves while everyone else had a feast. > > As for the sauce that sprayed from Molly's wand (sounding less and > less appitizing as I think about it) she may have summoned it from > somewhere else...the ultimate carry out, or it may have been > conjured. Finwitch: Easy for kids on a diet, though - with all the fattening dishes as conjured, they can have all the taste, but not the fat... Anyway, maybe all that conjured food is why James Potter kept going to the kitchen... All in all, I don't think ALL the food is conjured. As to why it's taught in transfiguration - well, thay're turning air into something solid. Air does consist of molecules, after all - so they're transfiguring some i.e. Nitrogen-molecules into say - sleeping bags? Potioncat: > I wonder how parents teach kids the day to day magic if magic isn't > allowed over the holidays? "Gee, Mum, I'd help with the dishes, but > it's against the rules." "Hey, Mum, would you do my laundry? I'm > not allowed you know." > > Potioncat (who would have a word or two with DD about that underage > magic rule!!) Finwitch: Oh, what fun... but: 1) Rich wizard families have house-elves to do all the chores. 2) not-so-rich wizard families - like Weasleys - seem to expect some chores in the Muggle way. No magic needed. 3) I certainly don't see a Muggle-born wiz. kids as really needing magic, they're just to do things Muggle way. And um - I believe some, if not most of them - DO break the rule, possibly get a warning note, but not much more than that. (and if it's in a wizarding family, they do NOTHING, as they cannot tell if it was the kid or the parent). And er - it's not a rule Dumbledore made up. It's a *ministry* Law/Decree! (and I'd like to face *them* up for quite a lot...) And I do think they ought to lift the ban - it's putting Harry's life at risk! Finwitch From finwitch at yahoo.com Wed Nov 17 08:29:00 2004 From: finwitch at yahoo.com (finwitch) Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2004 08:29:00 -0000 Subject: DD admits he's an animagus In-Reply-To: <20041116233730.89896.qmail@web53102.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118063 Juli: > there's a third option: he is neither, he's just so > powerful he can escape the Dementors (wait, was this > scene before or after the 5 DEs escaped and the > dementors quitted?) without using a wand. But, if it > was after the dementors left Azkaban, how easy would > it be for him to just leave. > > Juli - thinkig what secret powers DD may have Finwitch: Who says it's a *secret* power of Dumbledore's? Fawkes will do just fine! (And if Dementors already left, it's EASY. Just blow up the wall, and fly off with Fawkes. You can use Muggle explosives if the cell was somehow charmed against doing magic - Fawkes would bring them) And Dumbledore DID use wandless magic to do out the Ministry Officials, then he grapped Fawkes' tail and flew off. (Fawkes doing the flying, of course). Finwitch From finwitch at yahoo.com Wed Nov 17 08:53:39 2004 From: finwitch at yahoo.com (finwitch) Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2004 08:53:39 -0000 Subject: Prophecies and fate; Trelawney In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118064 > > Hickengruendler: > The first reason is, that > she said she worded the prophecy very carefully, which to me highly > suggests that the meaning is not quite as obvious as it wseems to be. > But there's also a clear hint in the book, IMO. Firenze says in his > lesson basically, that the abilities of the humans to read the future > are limited and that they often interprete the signs wrongly. I do > not think it's by accident that JKR put this in the book, which in > his end had a prophecy whose content seemed to be a bit obvious (at > least for us readers. I disagree with the fans who think, that Harry > shouldn't be surprised). > > However, I must admit that I don't really know which part of the > prophecy is the one whose interpretation will turn out to be wrong. > Trelawney clearly said, that one has to kill the other in the end, > therefore I don't really see any loophole in this part of the > prophecy. Finwitch: All this business with Fate- hmm-mm. You know, Fate may be something that's intended, a way things 'should' be going, but nothing's to say it can't go wrong. And the prophecy, (much like any prediction of a true Seer, I think) is there - and every WORD of it is true, but we mustn't draw conclucions, for it is can be as misleading as Robert Jordan's Aes Sedai can be. As for that, Trelawney might well be a Seer, but: Her *opinions* (such as Harry born in mid-winter, or the 13 at the table) don't count as a prediction - but um - first to leave is the first to die - doesn't the language use the word 'leave' as a metaphor for death? I wonder though, maybe James Potter *was* born in mid-winter? Finwitch From R.Vink2 at chello.nl Wed Nov 17 09:05:02 2004 From: R.Vink2 at chello.nl (Renee) Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2004 09:05:02 -0000 Subject: JKR's writing in OoP (was Re: Sirius's Future) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118065 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "cat_kind" wrote: > > > Renee: > > Sirius's death may not be overly dramatic, Harry's reaction > to it certainly is, and that's where the significance lies. > > catkind: > >> > Harry's reaction is overly dramatic for what? It's certainly in > character with his behaviour in the rest of the book, he's dramatic about everything, particularly Dumbledore and Sirius. And - well - poor tragic orphan loses yet another father figure... > Renee: Actually, what I was trying to say was that Harry's reaction is dramatic, without the overly. I guess my wording was a bit sloppy. For Harry, the reaction isn't overly dramatic. Renee From finwitch at yahoo.com Wed Nov 17 09:23:18 2004 From: finwitch at yahoo.com (finwitch) Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2004 09:23:18 -0000 Subject: Did DD lie about the Prophecy? / Sirius In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118066 > Del replies : > > 2.2. Sirius cracks under torture and reveals that Peter is the SK. > After that, all LV has to do is grab Peter, and he will obtain the > Secret very easily, even if Peter is a good guy. > > I still fail to see how the SK switch was such a brilliant idea. Finwitch: You forgot something: LV is a Legilimens. He could use that with Sirius for the secret while torturing him. However, he can't find it, because Sirius isn't the SK. He may stubbornly go on with Sirius and get nowhere. Well, yes, if 2.2. took place, Voldemort would go for PP. He doesn't know where Peter is, so he'll need to torture Sirius again(or whatever) to find that out. But that's not the point here, keeping the secret. Sirius' capture itself would have alerted the Order (who of course knew where Potters were, and thought Sirius was the SK) and they could have *moved* in time. So, Voldemort hears the Secret, about where Potters live, too LATE. They have already gone to Hogwarts/HQ of the Order/someplace else, this time with Dumbledore as SK. Finwitch From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com Wed Nov 17 09:37:50 2004 From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (arrowsmithbt) Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2004 09:37:50 -0000 Subject: The Second Prophecy In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118067 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "dungrollin" wrote: > > Kneasy: > > The end of GoF? Why? The graveyard scene was just the resurrection. > > Dungrollin: > Okay, I'll grudgingly grant you that. But... > > Kneasy again: > > Q. Is Voldy greater and more terrible than ever? > > A. Like hell he is. He's in hiding along with the mad bitch and > > his backing band is in the slammer. > > Dungrollin: > And Sirius is now dead. In which case, hasn't he left it a little > late to be giving a helping hand on achieving greatness and > terribleness surpassing previous efforts? > > Or... You're not in sad denial too, are you...? > > Dungrollin > Who's not so fond of smileys, but feels that a couple may be > appropriate after that last comment... Never use those 'emoticons' myself, either. Horrible things. But SAD DENIAL? Arrgh! What an abominable accusation! Nearly dropped my FEATHERBOA, the one with ESE!Sirius motifs cunningly juxtaposed with RIP!Harry badges. No; since we're going to hear more about Sirius I reckon there'll be a holdover - something he did in the past that'll cause big trouble for Harry in the future. An unwelcome legacy, if you like. If I'm wrong, I'm wrong, but I can sit here dreaming dreams of foul deeds, betrayal and other happy thoughts. Kneasy From willsonkmom at msn.com Wed Nov 17 11:30:39 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2004 11:30:39 -0000 Subject: "Conjured" food (was Re: The Nature of Galleons) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118068 > > Finwitch: > > Oh, what fun... but: > > 1) Rich wizard families have house-elves to do all the chores. > > 2) not-so-rich wizard families - like Weasleys - seem to expect some > chores in the Muggle way. No magic needed. > > 3) I certainly don't see a Muggle-born wiz. kids as really needing > magic, they're just to do things Muggle way. > > And um - I believe some, if not most of them - DO break the rule, > possibly get a warning note, but not much more than that. (and if > it's in a wizarding family, they do NOTHING, as they cannot tell if > it was the kid or the parent). Potioncat: Well, I have to wonder how the parents can teach them if they really aren't supposed to work magic. I don't think laundry and cooking are taught at Hogwarts. But I'm just as sure that JKR wasn't worrying about how fictional chararacters learn these things. > Finwich: > And er - it's not a rule Dumbledore made up. It's a *ministry* > Law/Decree! (and I'd like to face *them* up for quite a lot...) And I > do think they ought to lift the ban - it's putting Harry's life at > risk! Potioncat: Hmmm, looks like I need to polish my cannon. That was movie contamination, DD saying, "I wrote quite a few bylaws myself" or something to that nature. > From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com Wed Nov 17 12:08:27 2004 From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (arrowsmithbt) Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2004 12:08:27 -0000 Subject: Who knows? DD knows, that's who. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118069 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Geoff Bannister" wrote: > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "arrowsmithbt" > wrote: > > Kneasy: > > I like it! Gotterdammerung! Ragnarok! The Fenris Wolf (Lupin), the > Great > > Serpent (Slytherin), Hagrid as Thor, DD as Odin (Moody would be > better; > > never mind), blood everywhere, Hogwarts/Valhalla burns, the Giant > Squid > > gently poaches to form a sea-food platter with Trevor and the > Merpeople, > > maybe three survive and then Yggdrasil (the Whomping Willow - > should > > be an ash but who cares?) sprouts again. > > A new world. A satisfyingly cathartic climax. Cue credits. > > > > > > > > Carolyn > > > Who thinks Kneasy is a bad influence > > > > Tsk, tsk. Why blame me? > > As you know I'm totallly opposed to gratuitous violence, calumny and > > fanciful theories. You must be thinking of three other fellas. > > Geoff: > Why is it when you go into this "taking everybody with you when you > go" mode that I am strangely reminded of Bumble in "Oliver Twist" who > castigated the Sowerberrys after Oliver had escaped because they had > fed him meat? > > BTW, you forgot the White Witch, Sauron and the Einheriar of the > Herlathing inter alia.... > Meat? No, it wasn't the meat (rationing - remember?) but other early influences. When nowt but a dewy-eyed innocent I was exposed to an alternative world-view - from Tom Lehrer. I've never looked back since first hearing his rousing rendition of "We'll All Go Together When We Go", a cheerful ditty celebrating universal extinction. (His love songs are good too - "I Hold Your Hand In Mine" being a particular favourite.) Once infected by his admittedly iconoclastic doctrines, any imagined catastrophic outcome for HP can be viewed with equanimity, or even gleeful anticipation. And anyway it's better to end with a bang rather than a whimper. It'd be so depressing having bands of ex-wizards wandering through a non-magical Hogsmeade, beating off Lupin every full moon, subsisting on charred owl-on-a-stick, constantly pestered by Social Services counsellors determined to 'normalise' their attitudes and behaviour. Ugh. The horror! The horror! Give me a joyful massacre for preference any day. Kneasy From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com Wed Nov 17 12:23:59 2004 From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (arrowsmithbt) Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2004 12:23:59 -0000 Subject: The Second Prophecy/Innocent!Peter In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118070 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "carolynwhite2" wrote: > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Barry Arrowsmith > wrote: > > But Innocent!Peter. There's a challenge. Might take you up on that. > But fair warning, it'll be mostly circumstantial evidence, not much > canon around to back that one up, so it'll > be 'coulds',, 'mights', 'maybes'. > > You know - like the SHIPping posts. > > > > Ahem, says Carolyn: > Reminding people of a good paper from ConventionAlley: > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/115979 > > which prompted an interminable analysis of ESE! plots in post 115794. > > I think what motivates Peter is one of the most interesting subplots > in the book. If he did betray everyone (a very big If), and she never > explains why, I will be peeved. Hmm. Yes, that paper gave a detailed run-down of the fans thoughts on Peter, though IIRC none actually came up with a defence of him. Some seemed to be edging that way but stopped short before committing themselves. OK. Give me two or three days and I'll see what I can do about providing justification/explanation for how Unfortunate!Peter ended up as Igor to the arch-baddy. A replay of Edgar A. Poe - "Tales of Mystery and Imagination" - mostly imagination. Kneasy From garybec101 at comcast.net Wed Nov 17 13:03:33 2004 From: garybec101 at comcast.net (garybec) Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2004 13:03:33 -0000 Subject: Saying Voldemort's Name (Re: Quirrel) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118071 ---> khinterberg said: > > It has always bothered me that in the last chapter of > PS/SS Quirrell says Voldemort's name. > > > Why, when Death Eaters won't even say his name, can a > young professor with Vapormort on the back of his head > say it without any sign of fear whatsoever?< Flop added: > I really think you put your finger on it there. > Vapormort was on the back of his head. He was > POSSESSED by Vapormort! Although he was able to keep > some of his own personality so that others wouldn't > suspect, I really think that this was, in effect, > Voldemort saying his OWN name. > Becki adds; I am sorry if I am beating a dead horse, but I am way behind on my emails and I just had to address the Quirrell portion of this debate. Just to use my religion as a parallel, I am Catholic. I am a Eucharistic Minister, which means that I help distribute Communion. Any time that we pass across the alter, in front of the tabernacle, (the box in the center of the alter that the left over communion is placed), we are suppose to bow, in respect for Jesus, because as we Catholics believe, that the communion is the body of Christ, therefore, He is present in the tabernacle. The only time we are not to bow, is when we are walking back from distributing the communion to the parishioners. As we walk past the tabernacle, we are not to bow, because we are holding the Body of Christ in our hands. To tie this in with Quirrell. He has his Lord and Master in the back of his head, therefore perhaps it gives him license to use his name freely. I think this one is the exception, the others are typo's like Neri points out. (or not). Becki (who is so busy that she fears H-BP will be out before she gets caught up) From willsonkmom at msn.com Wed Nov 17 18:07:16 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2004 18:07:16 -0000 Subject: Canon times two Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118072 I'm way too experienced to ask this, but I will anyway. Have we discussed whether the awards on JKR's site are canon? I'm talking about the trophies that include such names as Percy Weasley, Sirius Black, Frank Longbottom, Bellatrix Black, Tom Riddle, James -----, Lily Evans. What does the group think? Did these characters earn awards or is this just window dressing? (This has come about because now the computer I'm using is bright enough for me to actually see the sights at the site.) We did once talk about a Quidditch book that includes a list of library patrons who checked it out from Hogwarts Library. Did we work it out that it was just decoration, or do we think it was canon? For that one, I'm wondering if we'll see a replacement for Lee Jordan? I'm voting for Theodore Nott. And speaking of Lee Jordan. Wonder if the Weasley twins will have a new employee or partner? Potioncat From carolynwhite2 at aol.com Wed Nov 17 18:22:04 2004 From: carolynwhite2 at aol.com (carolynwhite2) Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2004 18:22:04 -0000 Subject: The Second Prophecy (digression) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118073 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "iris_ft" wrote: > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Barry Arrowsmith > wrote: > > "One thing worth noticing is how the entire passage where Harry > relates Sybill's burblings to DD is constructed. > Iris: > snip> > We generally tend to consider the prophecies, and only the > prophecies; we barely consider "the way it's all presented". And > it's all presented according to Dumbledore. He is the one who > legitimates the prophecies, and who gives them their orientation. > Is he able to do it because he knew them even before Trelawney > pronounced their words? > > He says in PoA: "The consequences of our actions are always so > complicated, so diverse, that predicting the future is a very > difficult business, indeed " > His action, the night he met with Trelawney at the Hog's Head, had > one consequence: Several months later, Voldemort went after the > Potter to kill their son. Was it unexpected? > Or are we facing a long and patient manipulation? > > I'm not meaning by this that Dumbledore is evil. I'm just supposing > he's an operator, working hard, on something even more important > than defeating Voldemort. Something like the transfiguration of the > wizard world, with Voldemort and Harry as instruments. Will he be > lucky enough to reach his goal? > Carolyn: I think you are right to be suspicious. There have been numerous ingenious explanations as to how the eavesdropper might have been ejected at precisely the right moment, three lines into the prophecy, but it does stretch the bounds of credulity. The possibilities seem to be: (1) DD knew in advance what she might predict, perhaps because she had already made the prophecy *before*, to someone else, and they thought DD should hear it. Knowing what she was going to say perhaps suggested to him the idea of 'arranging' an eavesdropper, to be evicted at just the right point by (?) his brother Aberforth. But dangerous knowledge for the other person to have kept all these years. (2) There was no eavesdropper. He heard the prophecy by himself, and then ensured that someone gave Voldie a partial quote from it. For safety, that person would not be told the whole prophecy, because Voldie always knows when someone lies. DD may have given Snape this task, if he had already changed sides at this point, or perhaps Dumbledore chose Peter. DD would have been fully aware of Peter's weak character, and that he might be vulnerable to an approach by Voldy, and decided to use this to his advantage, although to Peter's ruin. Alternatively, Peter may have very bravely decided to act as a double agent at DD's request. Either way, if he performed this task, it led to his downfall later, when that fool Sirius made him secret keeper, and he was not strong enough to prevent Voldy extracting that secret from him. But I think there is also another aspect to the prophecies, which sort of fits in with JKR's view that you make your own luck. I think the prophecies can only be acted on by the people they are made to, and that possibly they are somewhat time-dependent. Dumbledore immediately made extensive and far-reaching plans based on the information that he heard, but then he is a very old and experienced wizard who spends his life considering alternative scenarios and strategies. Choosing to tell Harry about the first prophecy at the end of OOP is just another tactic, IMO to frighten Harry into behaving, and into thinking he has to acquire some amazing new range of skills in order to eventually kill Voldy. In fact, if you read the prophecy carefully, the key statement: 'either must die at the hand of the other for neither can live while the other survives' is just that, a statement. It is not actually enjoining either party to get on with it and start killing, it is only Dumbledore that says that's what it means. It's not information that Harry (or Voldy) needs to act on, it was an information bulletin for Dumbledore alone to use as he saw fit. Harry, on the other hand, is just a boy. He didn't have any idea what Trelawny's second prophecy was about when he heard it, or even that she was making one. It is also extremely significant that just as he is about to tell Ron and Hermione about it (end of Chap 16, POA), his explanation is cut off by the news from Hagrid about Buckbeak. This is a well-worn device in the books to prevent people knowing useful facts just when they need them. Hermione, for one, would have immediately started to trying to work it out - and she's good at riddles and logic. That second prophecy, in effect, went unused at the time it was most relevant. DD immediately started to turn it over in his mind as soon as he heard it, of course, but it was for Harry to act on (or not), and the moment has passed. On this analysis, it does seem that he could ignore the second prophecy indefinitely if he likes. That would annoy Dumbledore, wouldn't it ? Iris: > Just my (confused) opinion, lost among many, many others, Carolyn: Not the only one who is confused, but do not fear, your posts are never lost - I always look out for them . From chnc1024 at AOL.COM Wed Nov 17 19:14:58 2004 From: chnc1024 at AOL.COM (chnc1024 at AOL.COM) Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2004 14:14:58 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] Canon times two Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118074 In a message dated 11/17/2004 10:11:36 AM Pacific Standard Time, willsonkmom at msn.com writes: Have we discussed whether the awards on JKR's site are canon? I'm talking about the trophies that include such names as Percy Weasley, Sirius Black, Frank Longbottom, Bellatrix Black, Tom Riddle, James -----, Lily Evans. What does the group think? Did these characters earn awards or is this just window dressing? ********************************************************************** And don't forget the trophy that shows only the letters -HA....(to the left of Percy's trohpy). I have speculated that perhaps these people could be the one's who will be dead by the end of book 7. Sirius, James, Lily, are already dead, they didn't have special awards to the school, or Ron would have told Harry about his mom having a trophy after having to muggle clean all of them in CoS. And if Percy had a trophy you know he wouldn't be too shy to point that fact out! Chancie-Who doesn't think the HA is for HArry, but for HAgrid [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From manawydan at ntlworld.com Wed Nov 17 19:29:56 2004 From: manawydan at ntlworld.com (manawydan) Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2004 19:29:56 -0000 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Muggleborns choosing WW References: <1100639623.5704.74187.m7@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <000601c4ccdb$d3ac3900$704b6d51@f3b7j4> No: HPFGUIDX 118075 Pippin wrote: >It seems to me jobs are like marriages, the people who are >happy in them can find just as many things to complain about >as the ones who aren't. We can't be sure Stan and Ernie aren't >happy and contented because they've been taught not to aspire >to anything better, just like the House Elves. It's true that the only time we see Ernie "off-duty", he's not talking about the joys of being a bus conductor but then, you can't but make allowances for the circumstances! If our own world is anything to go by, even though many people are taught not to aspire to anything better, it doesn't stop them from being discontented with their lot... But really, the point is that Muggles, like us, have to put a lot of hard work in in order to get things done. There are a lot of hard, dirty manual processes involved in almost everything from cooking and cleaning up to mining and metal bashing. The WW doesn't have those processes because magic is so much more efficient than technology: its processes are clean, quick, and seemingly healthy. There just isn't any evidence that the kind of pointless demeaning jobs that abound in our world even exist there. And if you strip out the unpleasant part of work, then it's understandable that job satisfaction would be higher. >I do wonder about the person who has the potential to be a >skillful surgeon or a brilliant software engineer, but has only a >mediocre magical talent. Are they really better off in the WW? It's >fun to wish we were witches and wizards, but the law of >averages predicts that half of us will be less talented than the >other half. If someone has the potential but it's unrealised, then it may well be that they know no better. If they _already_ have begun to develop their potential, then I suspect that they would be able to contribute to WW society just as to Muggle society: a potential computer whiz would have the kind of mindset that could take research into spell development in directions which would seem obvious to our eyes but would be inconceivable to the notorious illogic of the WW Cheers Ffred O Benryn wleth hyd Luch Reon Cymru yn unfryd gerhyd Wrion Gwret dy Cymry yghymeiri From mgrantwich at yahoo.com Wed Nov 17 19:35:47 2004 From: mgrantwich at yahoo.com (Magda Grantwich) Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2004 11:35:47 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Prophecies and fate; writing what you don't believe (was:The Second Prophecy) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041117193547.4924.qmail@web53109.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 118076 There are two tricks to serious prophecies, in JKR's world and in myth and legend. 1. They always bite you in the butt (which is why I'm sure that there's something about the current one that we're missing or overlooking) and 2. They're passive until they're activated by the person(s) they're most concerned with. For instance, Voldemort kicks off the first prophecy by trying to eliminate baby Harry and ends up bringing about the very thing he was trying to prevent. In ancient myth, Oedipus' father tries to get around the prophecy that Oedipus would kill his father and marry his mother by abandoning him, thereby setting in motion the train of events that leads to those very outcomes. I believe that (2.) is how JKR can reconcile a prophecy with her strong belief in people making choices and being in charge of their own destinies. Magda __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Meet the all-new My Yahoo! - Try it today! http://my.yahoo.com From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Wed Nov 17 21:14:43 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2004 21:14:43 -0000 Subject: Plot in OotP In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118077 Lupinlore: > I think, Alla, that many of us simply don't have much confidence that > JKR *will* continue on to connect the dots. Lets face it, her record > for coherence of plot points isn't always very good. Dumbledore > supposedly loves Harry but leaves him to be abused by the Dursleys > and Snape. Sirius manages to spend twelve years in Azkaban despite > the existance of both Veritaserum and Legilemency. The supposed > fearful Dark Wizards seem to forget the Unforgiveables in their > battle with a bunch of teenagers. The Ministry is so poorly guarded > a bunch of teenagers evades the security in the most secure area, the > Department of Mysteries. The list goes on and on. > > Therefore we have the deep sinking feeling that a lot of the plot > points and themes brought up in OOTP will never be followed up. The > DA will probably appear in the future, but Umbridge and her attempted > murder may never be mentioned again. Harry may be allowed a couple > of pages to mourn Sirius and then all of the complicated emotional > and moral questions arising in the wake of Sirius' death, including > those concerning Harry and Dumbledore's relationship, might well get > swept under the rug. The issue of Snape's behavior will not be > addressed believably, but instead some contrived plot point (i.e. "I > trust Severus Snape") will be used so that Snape can continue to act > the same with no consequences. The questions about Harry's emotions > and the damage inflicted by the Dursleys and others will be allowed > to lapse. > > That is the fear that many have about OOTP. That instead of > providing the introduction of important and interesting themes that > will be followed closely and brought to a conclusion, it will in the > end be just a collection of briefly mentioned topics that get brushed > aside and never again acknowledged or explored, or else will be dealt > with in ways that are simplistic and contrived. > Alla: Oh, I do see your point very well. I did say that I reserve the judgment, did not I? if she does not connect the dots, as I expect her too, I will be annoyed. You are absolutely right - I can start very very long rant on Sirius and Veritaserum, incredibly long in fact. Did she even give satisfactory explanation, ever? Well, on the subject of Snape's behaviour, I guess I still have more faith in her than you are. I do expect that his behaviour will be addressed on much more in depth level than "I trust Snape", or as I said quite a few times, I expect a very nicely done carmic payback. I think she is actually very good in issuing those. Sirius spent twelve years in Azkaban for nothing (unless you believe he is ESE, of course, which I don't) I consider it to be a carmic payback for whatever he done to Snape in their youth. You know, case closed, paid in full, all that stuff. Since I believe that Snape also did quite a few nasty things to Sirius in their youth, I cannot wait to know what he is going to get :o) Ron hurt Harry in GoF and got Harry screaming at him for nothing in OOP, etc.,etc. So, I guess I believe that she can connect the dotes. Dumbledore left Harry at Dursleys. Well, we are ready to look for deep answers, but what if indeed he simply had no other choice, that harry would not be safe anywhere else? What if the simple answer is indeed a true one? On the subject of DE not issuing unforgivables in the MOM battle... Well, I am ready to suspend disbelief, because I strongly believe that books are oriented towards younger readers and she does not want to have too much violence in it. Even within the story, they were mainly concerned with Harry, so no wonder they did not pay too much attention to other kids. Kind of. Yes, yes, and yes if Harry "mastering his emotions" will mean that he will be happy and healthy and ready to fight Voldemort on the second page of HBP, I will be ready to throw the book out of the window, literally. :o) The books are not psychological treatise, but she introduced abuse and grief as reaistic emotions for Harry and I do want her to follow up on it. As I said, I am willing to cut her some slack and see what happens. From navarro198 at hotmail.com Wed Nov 17 21:29:57 2004 From: navarro198 at hotmail.com (scoutmom21113) Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2004 21:29:57 -0000 Subject: Who to Trust?; WAS: The Second Prophecy plus a correction In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118078 Chrusotoxos wrote: Wh-what are you people THINKING about??! *splutters* Ok, for a book having nice jolts and fake clues, but I really think that here we're going out of HP and into Stephen King... *rolls her eyes* Bookworm: Did you know that Stephen King is one of JKR's biggest fans? Chrusotoxos wrote: I really can't believe that someone out there is distrusting Sirius...I mean, I'm not in love with him, dead or not. I think he's handsome, brilliant and ironical, but godamn arrogant and immature. But he's on the good side. Was. Bookworm: Actually, if you read annemehr's and my posts closely, you will see that we both agree that Sirius and Remus Lupin are Not ESE. We were disagreeing with the conspiracy theorists. Chrusotoxos wrote: Dumbledore trusted Sirius. And if we can't trust Dumbledore, we can't trust anyone... Bookworm: That's what many are asking ? *can* we trust Dumbledore? Dumbledore has proven to be fallible. Will Harry continue to trust him? Can he? Ravenclaw Bookworm From nrenka at yahoo.com Wed Nov 17 21:34:50 2004 From: nrenka at yahoo.com (nrenka) Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2004 21:34:50 -0000 Subject: Harry left at the Dursleys (Was Re: Plot in OotP) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118079 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "dumbledore11214" wrote: > Alla: > Dumbledore left Harry at Dursleys. Well, we are ready to look for > deep answers, but what if indeed he simply had no other choice, > that harry would not be safe anywhere else? What if the simple > answer is indeed a true one? It's not the whole measure of the situation, but I honestly think that the safety angle is continually underrated. First of all, to be slightly meta about it, I think JKR considers it important, given her comments of "If DD were Harry's relative, why would he have had to go to the Dursleys?" Keep in mind what Bellatrix and posse were able to do to two fully- trained Aurors, who had canonically defied Voldemort three times (although god only knows what THAT means). That means that they were scary enough to take on some fairly high-powered wizards and wipe the floor with them in a particularly unpleasant way. Baby Harry surely would have been in for worse, if he'd been obtainable. No, whatever protects Privet Drive must be really fairly strong. Although that raises the questions of traceability, etc. there. Now, this doesn't fully address why Dumbledore didn't intervene there, but I think we have more coming there per comments about his letter to Petunia, and the coherent if ungratifying resort of how Dumbledore doesn't *force* people. That is to say, he lets people make their own mistakes. (side note: I note in passing that I do not buy the extremely manipulative Dumbledore theories--he strikes me as something of a classical liberal in how he generally lets people work things out on their own--I'm thinking in part of all the cases in CoS where he asks Harry if he has something to say, looks him in the eyes, but doesn't push it. DD *must* be using Legilimency, but he leaves Harry to act or not on his own. Hard canon to the contrary appreciated, as always.) -Nora gets back to operatic heaven with a new recording of Iphigenie en Tauride that is provoking squees of joy and amazement From gbannister10 at aol.com Wed Nov 17 22:33:09 2004 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2004 22:33:09 -0000 Subject: Who knows? DD knows, that's who. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118080 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "arrowsmithbt" wrote: Kneasy: > Meat? No, it wasn't the meat (rationing - remember?) but other early > influences. > When nowt but a dewy-eyed innocent I was exposed to an alternative > world-view - from Tom Lehrer. I've never looked back since first > hearing his rousing rendition of "We'll All Go Together When We Go", > a cheerful ditty celebrating universal extinction. (His love songs are > good too - "I Hold Your Hand In Mine" being a particular favourite.) Geoff: Interesting how people's reactions differ. When I was at college, I also had a goodly dose of Tom Lehrer and absolutely loved him. Since then I have plagiarised and allowed no one's work to evade my eyes...... But, I have no wish to reduce Harry and the others to smoking piles of ash or ruin the Wizarding World nor fire any missiles into the air. Perhaps I felt that our mutual "other" Tom was taking a distorted view of everything like another Tom we both know....... It's all a bit of a riddle. :-) Geoff (who does use smileys - especially with Kneasy) http://www.aspectsofexmoor.com From willsonkmom at msn.com Wed Nov 17 22:46:14 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2004 22:46:14 -0000 Subject: Who to Trust?; WAS: The Second Prophecy plus a correction In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118081 > Chrusotoxos wrote: > Dumbledore trusted Sirius. And if we can't trust Dumbledore, we can't > trust anyone... > > Bookworm: > That's what many are asking ? *can* we trust Dumbledore? > > Dumbledore has proven to be fallible. Will Harry continue to trust > him? Can he? > Potioncat: Well, Dumbledore is no more a Death Eater than Severus Snape is. So what are they? I think the dynamic duo are Knights of Walpurgis. Of course, now I'm not sure which one would be batman... From inkling108 at yahoo.com Wed Nov 17 22:46:48 2004 From: inkling108 at yahoo.com (inkling108) Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2004 22:46:48 -0000 Subject: The Second Prophecy -- Differences between book and film) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118082 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "annemehr" wrote: > I'm just wondering if we can add another name to the possibilities for > the first prophecy. I mean, Barty Crouch, Jr. Here's something he > says in GoF, "Veritaserum": > > "Tell me about the Quidditch World Cup," said Dumbledore. > > "Winky talked my father into it," said Crouch, still in the same > monotonous voice. "She spent months persuading him[...] But Winky > didn't know that I was growing stronger. I was starting to fight my > father's Imperius curse. There were times when I was almost myself > again. There were brief periods when I seemed outside his control. [...]" > > So, some months before the Quidditch World Cup in late August, Barty > began breaking the "chains" of his father's control. A night in June, > perhaps? Admittedly, it would be a honking great coincidence if it > began shortly before midnight on the very same day that Peter and > Sirius escaped Hogwarts... This also occurred to me, as Crouch Jr. is the only likely suspect who is really in chains (albeit psychological chains) as the prophecy is spoken, Peter being free to run around as a rat and Sirius being on the lam... I realize that this thread has meanwhile gone in another direction from the prophecy as such, but it may be a relevant point that in the film version of PoA the wording of the second prophecy was changed. Obviously they could not do that without JKR's approval, and the changes that were made might shed some light on this whole issue. Not yet having access to the DVD I can't quote the film version exactly but I do recall that a line was added something like "blood will be shed." There was no blood shed the night of the Shreiking Shack scene, so it's obviously referring to some other event (the murders of Crouch's father or Bertha Jorkins? Taking blood from Harry to assist Voldemort's resurrection?) Does anyone recall exactly what changes were made? From spherissa at gmail.com Wed Nov 17 11:17:20 2004 From: spherissa at gmail.com (Amanda Coleman) Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2004 21:47:20 +1030 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: The Second Prophecy In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <8c20328104111703176d032502@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 118083 I have long had a niggling suspicion that McGonagall might be ESE!; who would shock more? And I shall write more on this when I feel less like the grass has been pulled out from beneath my feet. Yours Amanda From sophierom at yahoo.com Wed Nov 17 22:53:27 2004 From: sophierom at yahoo.com (sophierom) Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2004 22:53:27 -0000 Subject: Plot in OotP In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118084 Lupinlore wrote: > Lets face it, her record > for coherence of plot points isn't always very good. Dumbledore > supposedly loves Harry but leaves him to be abused by the Dursleys > and Snape. Sirius manages to spend twelve years in Azkaban despite > the existance of both Veritaserum and Legilemency. The supposed > fearful Dark Wizards seem to forget the Unforgiveables in their > battle with a bunch of teenagers. The Ministry is so poorly guarded > a bunch of teenagers evades the security in the most secure area, the > Department of Mysteries. Sophierom: Interesting points, but I'm not so sure I'd agree that these failings are as bad as you make out. 1. Dumbledore - would it have been better for him to raise him in the Wizarding World, where Harry would have been more vulnerable to Voldemort and/or death eaters? True, Voldemort wasn't much to speak of in Harry's childhood days, but Dumbledore couldn't have known how long it was going to take LV to return to power. It might have been that DD had the choice between mean relatives - whose home offered blood protection against the darkest wizard in an age - and a loving, caring family who couldn't have protected Harry in the face of dark magic. I, too, hate that Harry had to grow up suffering the abuse of the Dursleys, but Dumbledore had more to think about than how happy Harry's childhood was. In fact, when Harry was an infant, perhaps Dumbledore didn't love Harry all that much; perhaps he only knew enough of him to think, oh, cute child, and by the way, he's the only one who can destroy LV so we have to protect him for the good of greater wizardkind. As for Snape, Dumbledore is perhaps guiltier. The degree to which Snape abuses Harry has already been argued a great deal on within the group, but even if you believe Snape is truly and horribly abusive to Harry, we again have to consider the fact that DUmbledore has to consider more than Harry's happiness. As a spy, Snape is necessary to the Order. As a former Death Eater, Snape is a good indication of how powerful LV is becoming (dark mark darkening as he grows stronger). So, Dumbledore has to balance the problems Snape presents to Harry with the benefits (information and some measure of protection, as evidenced in PS and POA). I can't argue for sure that Dumbledore is making the best decisions - perhaps he could have done more to coerce the Dursleys into treating Harry better; perhaps he could chastise Snape more for his behavior towards Harry. But in the long run, Dumbledore probably thinks he's doing what's best for wizarding kind. His love for Harry grows as he watches Harry grow at Hogwarts, thus creating the conflict we see come to a head during OotP. Indeed, in that book, Dumbledore loves Harry too much, perhaps. He's so concerned about protecting Harry from the prophecy (Harry, you have to become a killer) that in keeping the information from him, his actions indirectly cause greater harm (Sirius's death, teens in danger, etc.). JKR is actually addressing this issue well enough for me. In the beginning of the relationship between Dumbledore and Harry, Dumbledore makes the most callous choices because he wants to put wizardingkind above the happiness of one child. But, as the relationship deepens, Dumbledore begins to love Harry so much that his emotions interfere with good decision making. We're seeing the decline of Dumbledore as we we see the rise of Harry and Voldemort. It's kind of sad, really! 2. Sirius in Azkaban - Could it be explained by the fact that Sirius himself never put up much of a defense? I'll admit that I can find no canon evidence of this, but we do know that there was no trial. This suggests either that Sirius did not put up much of a defense himself or that the Ministry really had it out for him. If Sirius, by his silence and by the context of the scene, seemed to be guilty, why would the Ministry use Veritaserum or Legilimency? Imagine, in today's world, that someone refused to put up a defense if s/he were charged with a terrorist act. Would justice overcome the public hysteria and fear of the moment? It really depends on the society - and perhaps the WW society has a weak concept of the right of the defendant to a strong defense, no matter how heinous the crime, no matter how guilty he may appear. If Sirius refused to stand up for himself, if all he did was laugh madly and scream like a lunatic, well, who was going to come to his defense? Lupin or Dumbledore, both of whom believed Sirius was the Potters' secret keeper? This begs the question, then, of why Sirius refused to put up a defense. I believe others have suggested that perhaps Sirius felt he deserved to be in Azkaban for what he had done. When Hagrid insists that he must take Harry to Dumbledore, perhaps Sirius believed he had nothing else to live for; he believed he WAS guilty because he was stupid enough to trust Peter with this all-important secret. He's just lost his best friend, and Sirius, by reputation and action, was a pretty rash, spontaneous man. Also, it's interesting that Sirius doesn't try to escape until he figures out Peter's location. This also suggests that he feels he deserves to be in prison, and the only thing that moves him away from guilt is his need for revenge and perhaps also his concern for Harry. If everyone, including Sirius, believed he was guilty, there would have been no reason to use Veritaserum or Legilimency. It appears to most people, including Dumbledore, that Sirius was the secret keeper and that given the nature of the Fidelius charm, he had to have given the information to LV about the Potter's location. Sirius appears guilty, he makes no effort to deny his guilt, and therefore, the WW accepts that he is, indeed, guilty. True, the Ministry did not undergo a very thorough or accurate investigation, but again, I think the hysteria of the time probably meant that the WW was less interested in justice and more interested in retribution and security. As I stated earlier, there's no canon evidence to suggest that Sirius didn't put up a defense - but I also can't find any to suggest that he DID put up a defense. If I'm wrong about this, please correct me! I'd love to know. I was only able to do a cursory glance at HP-Lexicon because my books are in storage at the moment. 3.Use of unforgivables - This goes back to the fake!Moody and Bellatrix comments - to use an unforgivable, you really have to mean it. But I think there is probably more than just intent involved in spellcasting, even with spells less dangerous than the unforgivables. Why do the kids at Hogwarts have to practice spells, even simple spells? Shouldn't they be able to do them immediately, so long as they can pronounce the spells correctly? Maybe spellcasting takes more than a superficial intent - maybe it takes a sort of internalizing of the spell and a level of magical power that varies from wizard to wizard. What if using an unforgivable uses up so much magical power that it would then become difficult to cast other spells for a while? Let's say the average Death Eater has the same magical power as the average wizard. My guess is that s/he can't just throw around unforgivables like they're calling out Grade 1 spells or the wizard in question will find it very difficult to defend him/herself against magical attack. I don't know enough on the subject, but I wonder if there's a balance between offensive and defensive capabilities that depends on the wizard's power. Also, if unforgivables are difficult and draining to cast, and the death eaters think they can defeat the kids with simpler spells, then why wouldn't they use the simpler spells? If I'm of average physical prowess and I have the choice between walking and running, I'll probably choose to walk if I know that i need to save my energy for other activities that day. Maybe that's a bad analogy - probably so, as I'm always bad at them. But, my larger point, I guess, it that I don't think we can assume that spells are all of equal difficulty even though they have very different effects. 4. Ministry poorly guarded - At first, I totally agreed with you on this. But then I thought of government buildings around the U.S. before terrorism became a major issue. I used to be able to walk into the Boston State House and wander around the halls - even sneak into various offices and conference rooms - without a care back in 2000. Now, you can't enter the building without going through metal detectors; there are guards all over the place; the loading areas are blocked off; in essence, the security is much tighter. If JKR makes it easy for the teens to enter the ministry AFTER the government knows LV is back, then I'll agree that this is a major plot hole. But, as it stands, the ministry believes there's no real threat. I don't find it all that hard to believe that the building has very little security. Of course, this doesn't explain how Harry got into the most secure area of the ministry, for even back in 2000, I couldn't have walked into a senator's office or important document vault unannounced. But this is where the Death Eaters play a role. The Death Eaters had already gotten into the DoM - didn't they neutralize any security that was present before Harry arrived? After all, LV really wants Harry to get into the right room, so he's going to order his goons to make sure that Harry doesn't run into problems. Perhaps this should have been a clue to Harry and the others that something was fishy. But they were too caught up in the moment to consider the fact that someone was making it very, very easy for them to enter. It's not so hard to believe that Lucius and gang got rid of any security that might have been surrounding the DoM in order to make sure that Harry got to the prophecy room without a problem. While I agree with you that OotP has its flaws, I think that JKR's plotting skills are pretty good. Perhaps we'd all agree (?) that a big issue in the books is the lack of information we really have about this world. For all the thousands of pages she's written, there are still so many questions unanswered. We still don't know the nature of spellcasting, the justice system in place in the WW, Snape's role, and so many other things. Of course, that's also the beauty of the series; we can talk and talk and talk until our faces are blue. There will, even by the end of the series, be unanswered questions and concepts in the WW that we'll never fully understand, but I have faith that JKR has and will continue to address the big issues adequately, leaving us the opportunity to imagine the smaller details for ourselves. Thanks for the interesting post! I had fun playing devil's advocate! :-) Best, Sophie From Vivamus at TaprootTech.com Wed Nov 17 12:15:04 2004 From: Vivamus at TaprootTech.com (Vivamus) Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2004 07:15:04 -0500 Subject: "Conjured" food (was Re: The Nature of Galleons) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200411170715482.SM01284@DEVBOX> No: HPFGUIDX 118085 > Finwitch: > > And um - I believe some, if not most of them - DO break the rule, > possibly get a warning note, but not much more than that. (and if > it's in a wizarding family, they do NOTHING, as they cannot tell if > it was the kid or the parent). > > And er - it's not a rule Dumbledore made up. It's a *ministry* > Law/Decree! (and I'd like to face *them* up for quite a lot...) And I > do think they ought to lift the ban - it's putting Harry's life at > risk! Vivamus: Good points, Finwitch, but I think you are forgetting something. The warnings Harry got were both about using magic in a muggle environment. The hover charm was used in a muggle household, and the patronus was in a muggle neighborhood and in the presence of a muggle, or something like that (best I can do without looking it up.) So kids from wizarding families would be using magic from the time they were small in their own homes and families. Wizard kids in muggle families, of course, would have different rules. Vivamus P.S. Snickersqueak wants me to mention that cats grow up using magic, too. From Vivamus at TaprootTech.com Wed Nov 17 12:42:40 2004 From: Vivamus at TaprootTech.com (Vivamus) Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2004 07:42:40 -0500 Subject: Consequences of Sirius' Death [WAS: The Second Prophecy] In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200411170743762.SM01284@DEVBOX> No: HPFGUIDX 118086 > Kneasy: > No; since we're going to hear more about Sirius I reckon there'll > be a holdover - something he did in the past that'll cause big > trouble for Harry in the future. An unwelcome legacy, if you like. > > If I'm wrong, I'm wrong, but I can sit here dreaming dreams of > foul deeds, betrayal and other happy thoughts. Vivamus: I'm betting it has something to do with 12 Grimauld Place. With Sirius, the last of the Blacks, now dead, ownership of the place would revert to his nearest relative, would it not? From what I remember of the family tree, it would be either Bellatrix or Narcissa who now owns 12GP. Given that house (1) has an evil house elf who knows many of the secrets of the OOtP, (2) is FULL of dark magic artifacts, with who-knows-what applications for weapons, etc., and (3) now belongs to the DEs, I can see major problems coming for the OOtP out of 12GP. For one, can you imagine the entire order having to do an emergency evacuation, because some small bureaucratic office in the MOM did a "who owns the magical property spell", and notified (by Owl) the rightful owner (Bellatrix or Narcissa)? Granted, the Order SHOULD be able to see that coming, but they might not be ready in time. Ownership of the property would probably overcome a Fidelius charm to hide it, so the Order could be forced to flee in panic. Several have speculated that Spinner's End is the new location of the OOtP, and that makes sense as a possibility. I was thinking, however, that Godric's Hollow has to come into play somewhere in the series, since it was mentioned so prominently in the first chapter of the first book, so perhaps we will find out more about that. Harry would certainly own it, but DD would want to keep him away from it, because (1) it actually *IS* his home, and knowing about it might break the "home" protection he gets from thinking of the Dursleys house as home, and (2) LV knows where it is. Then again, "Spinner's End" COULD be the name the OOtP now use for GH, since it was partially destroyed by the fight between James and LV. Perhaps acromantulas have come to live in the partially destroyed house, and the OOtP use spells to magically protect the part of the house they use. Vivamus, whose cat eats spiders whenever possible From Vivamus at TaprootTech.com Wed Nov 17 13:06:51 2004 From: Vivamus at TaprootTech.com (Vivamus) Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2004 08:06:51 -0500 Subject: Fate of the Captured DEs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200411170807297.SM01284@DEVBOX> No: HPFGUIDX 118087 What do you think will be the fate of the captured Death Eaters? With the dementors no longer guarding Azkaban, it is not secure. Putting them there would almost certainly result in their escaping and returning to LV. Now that the WW knows LV has returned, they are going to be fearful and paranoid -- probably even more so that fifteen years before. Every one of the captured DEs was caught red-handed assisting LV. There can be no doubt at all about the guilt of any of them. They were not only caught in the MOM, their presence there validates Harry's earlier story about their voluntary return to LV, their pledge to his service, and their attempted murder of Harry. Given the extreme danger to the entire world from LV, and the certainty of the guilt of the DEs, and the lack of any secure facility for containing them, there seems to me to be only one option (although I doubt JKR would do it, for plot reasons.) It seems to me the only reasonable thing Fudge CAN do (before he is voted out of office) is to hold the full Wizengamut trial right NOW on them, while they are still under the anti-disapparation jinx, validate all the facts on their guilt, and then march them over to the execution room and through the stone arch. I don't for a minute think that is what will actually happen, only that it is the most reasonable thing. The DEs will be sent to Azkaban, LV will break them out, and that's when the panic really will start to happen. That much is very predictable, but the real question is, what will happen then? I think we may get a Neville Chamberlain to replace Fudge, and we'll hear conciliatory language about "getting along" with LV and the DEs. If LV is really going to be greater and more powerful than ever before, then I think you will need to see the following things happen: * all (or nearly all) the DEs returned to LV * 12 Grimauld Place falling into LV's hands (it never did before) * conciliatory or compromising positions taken by the MoM vis-?-vis LV * Albus Dumbledore dead Can you imagine the tension if the above is the situation at the end of book 6? Vivamus From Vivamus at TaprootTech.com Wed Nov 17 13:48:32 2004 From: Vivamus at TaprootTech.com (Vivamus) Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2004 08:48:32 -0500 Subject: What make a "Qualified Wizard"? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200411170849233.SM01284@DEVBOX> No: HPFGUIDX 118088 Sorry if this has already been addressed, but I'm trying to recall if there is anything in canon about what makes a "qualified wizard". The only thing I can think of (other than age) is the OWLs. If that's so, that means Harry would no longer be under the underage decree, wouldn't it? Does anyone have more canon information on this, perhaps from a JKR interview? Vivamus From bex753 at yahoo.co.uk Wed Nov 17 17:14:52 2004 From: bex753 at yahoo.co.uk (Bex) Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2004 17:14:52 -0000 Subject: "Conjured" food (was Re: The Nature of Galleons) References: <200411161115883.SM01064@DEVBOX> Message-ID: <005601c4ccc8$f414dcf0$6401a8c0@quietpc> No: HPFGUIDX 118089 > Vivamus: > I think the food appearing is a matter of something similar to apparating. > Remember the kitchen under the main dining hall has tables that mirror the > hall above? Food magically goes up from the kitchen into the dining hall > to appear on the tables. > > When McGonagall or someone else conjures up a plate of pastries and > pumpkin juice, I imagine they are summoning from the kitchen, rather > than conjuring ex nihilo. Yep, you can't make food (lasting food that is). I always thought that and JKR seems to have confirmed that. If you could why not clothes, that's no more complex than food, poor old Lupin in his raggaty robes. Molly peels potatoes with the help of magic if you could make food you would swish your wand and the meal would be there. The food that appears at Hogwarts is transferred from one place to another that's all. Magic fades over time as inticated many times in the books. Bex From jhnbwmn at hotmail.com Wed Nov 17 23:26:41 2004 From: jhnbwmn at hotmail.com (johnbowman19) Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2004 23:26:41 -0000 Subject: What make a "Qualified Wizard"? In-Reply-To: <200411170849233.SM01284@DEVBOX> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118090 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Vivamus" wrote: > > Sorry if this has already been addressed, but I'm trying to recall if there > is anything in canon about what makes a "qualified wizard". The only > thing I can think of (other than age) is the OWLs. If that's so, that > means Harry would no longer be under the underage decree, wouldn't it? > > Does anyone have more canon information on this, perhaps from a JKR > interview? > > Vivamus Actually, we do know when a person is allowed to use magic outside of school. If we look at Fred and George, they were not allowed to use magic untill the summer leading into thier seventh year. We also know that at this time the twins are 17 because in GoF they are upset about not being able to compete in the TWT due to their not being 17. I am positve 17 is the age where a wizard is able to do magic outside of school, but I cannot think of where I read it. This means Harry will not be able to do magic untill the summer leading into his 7th year when he turns 17. John, who hopes he helped From ginnysthe1 at yahoo.com Wed Nov 17 23:31:15 2004 From: ginnysthe1 at yahoo.com (ginnysthe1) Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2004 23:31:15 -0000 Subject: Who to Trust?; WAS: The Second Prophecy plus a correction In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118091 Chrusotoxos wrote: Wh-what are you people THINKING about??! *splutters* ... Ok, for a book having nice jolts and fake clues, but I really think that here we're going out of HP and into Stephen King... *rolls her eyes* Then Bookworm: Did you know that Stephen King is one of JKR's biggest fans? Chrusotoxos wrote: I really can't believe that someone out there is distrusting Sirius...I mean, I'm not in love with him, dead or not. I think he's handsome, brilliant and ironical, but godamn arrogant and immature. But he's on the good side. Was. Bookworm: Actually, if you read annemehr's and my posts closely, you will see that we both agree that Sirius and Remus Lupin are Not ESE. We were disagreeing with the conspiracy theorists. Chrusotoxos wrote: Dumbledore trusted Sirius. And if we can't trust Dumbledore, we can't trust anyone... Bookworm: That's what many are asking ? *can* we trust Dumbledore? ... Dumbledore has proven to be fallible. Will Harry continue to trust him? Can he? Kim chiming in: What I see is that Dumbledore is *essentially* trustworthy, but being fallible (and why should he *not* be fallible?), there are times he can't be completely trusted. But who can tell when those times are? Ditto for Sirius and Lupin. To make a strange paraphrase, you can't trust some of the people all of the time... hmmm, not very good. How about: Everybody on the good side is trustworthy, but some are more trustworthy than others (and none of them can be trusted all of the time...) That's at least less cynical than "Trust no one, my friend" or "The only thing in life you can trust is work." Speaking for myself, I trust Dumbledore most of the time because he has already proven to be trustworthy most of the time (and by trustworthy, I mean trustworthy to Harry, Hagrid, and co., to the good side, the side I care most about; whereas to Voldemort, Bella, and co., to the bad side, Dumbledore is pretty untrustworthy). Then again, during the 1 per cent of the time that very trustworthy people can't be trusted, they can make really big mistakes... Time for an aspirin break. Kim From annegirl11 at juno.com Wed Nov 17 23:47:58 2004 From: annegirl11 at juno.com (annegirl11 at juno.com) Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2004 18:47:58 -0500 Subject: It's a conspiracy! Sirius and 1 Nov, 1981 (was: Re: [HPforGrownups] Re: Plot in OotP Message-ID: <20041117.184919.3204.1.annegirl11@juno.com> No: HPFGUIDX 118092 DD said: > You are absolutely right - I can start very very long rant on Sirius > and Veritaserum, incredibly long in fact. Did she even give > satisfactory explanation, ever? Conspiracy theory to follow: Have you guys seen the update to the Lexicon's timeline? As Steve said: "Is anyone else as curious as I am that Fudge would have been the first on the scene?" And Sirius never got a trial? Sounds fishy fishy to me! Sounds like Fudge wanted one of DD's top Order members out of the way. Why? I haven't the foggiest. So Peter wouldn't get caught? I find it very strange that a wizard as inept as Peter bested Sirius in a duel. Who *really* cast the Cheer Charm* that made Sirius cackle so crazily and make everyone believe he was a psycho? *Cheer Charm isn't canon. Someone on this list suggested that Sirius was laughing when he was arrested because Peter hit him with that charm during the duel. The question is, why? Was Peter trying to defend himself against Sirius without hurting him? Was Peter just that inept of a dueler? Or was the Cheer Charm part of a larger plot? After the arrest, I suspect Fudge did everything he could to make sure everyone forgot about Sirius being in prison -- perhaps to save his own skin. If it became known that Sirius was innocent, perhaps the entire plot could be unraveled. And how *did* Sirius figure out that night on Oct 31, 1981 that Voldemort was attacking the Potters? Did another supposed "good guy" tip Sirius off, so he'd go crazy with vengence and attack Peter? (Oh, please let it be Hagrid...) Talking about Sirius and Azkaban makes me so freaking depressed.... Aura ~*~ "What he didn't like about heroes was that they were usually suicidally gloomy when sober and homicidally insane when drunk." - Discword http://archive.skyehawke.com/authors.php?no=606 [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From nienna_anwamane at ntlworld.com Wed Nov 17 11:48:13 2004 From: nienna_anwamane at ntlworld.com (nienna_anwamane) Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2004 11:48:13 -0000 Subject: Magic for chores (wasRe: "Conjured" food) References: Message-ID: <009c01c4cc9b$53bb5680$e14dfea9@talyn> No: HPFGUIDX 118093 > Finwitch: > > 1) Rich wizard families have house-elves to do all the chores. > > 2) not-so-rich wizard families - like Weasleys - seem to expect > some chores in the Muggle way. No magic needed. > > 3) I certainly don't see a Muggle-born wiz. kids as really needing > magic, they're just to do things Muggle way. > Could some things like potions for example be under the radar? It's not active magic so maybe the ministry can't detect it. For things like washing clothes etc., could there be an ongoing spell? A charmed sponge that washes the dishes in the sink. "nienna_anwamane" From jlnbtr at yahoo.com Wed Nov 17 21:06:26 2004 From: jlnbtr at yahoo.com (Juli) Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2004 13:06:26 -0800 (PST) Subject: DD admits he's an animagus In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041117210626.7629.qmail@web53101.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 118094 > Juli: > But, if it was after the dementors left Azkaban, > how easy would it be for him to just leave. > > Juli - thinkig what secret powers DD may have > > Finwitch: > Who says it's a *secret* power of Dumbledore's? > Fawkes will do just fine! (And if Dementors already > left, it's EASY. Just blow up the wall, and fly off > with Fawkes. ) And Dumbledore DID use wandless > magic to do out the Ministry Officials, then he > grabbed Fawkes' tail and flew off. Juli again: What I meant was that DD must have many other powers we don't know about; in book 5 we found out he's a legimens, so maybe in book 6 and 7 we'll find out that he has some other cool powers. Like how he seems to know what happens all over Hogwarts. I agree with you, escaping Azkaban without dementors would be too easy for him, he took out 2 aurors, DU and the MoM in half a second. I would have liked to see it, but now DD will probably be considered a hero (well deserved!). Juli From jlnbtr at yahoo.com Wed Nov 17 21:33:43 2004 From: jlnbtr at yahoo.com (Juli) Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2004 13:33:43 -0800 (PST) Subject: The Second Prophecy plus a correction In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041117213343.26276.qmail@web53101.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 118095 > chrusotoxos wrote: > I really can't believe that someone out there is > distrusting Sirius...I mean, I'm not in love with > him, dead or not. I think he's handsome, brilliant > and ironical, but godamn arrogant and immature. > But he's on the good side. Was. I agree with you Chrusotoxos, Sirius was a great guy, a bit inmature, but nice, he deeply cared for Harry and the Trio, and for the rest of the order, he acted like a child because in his mind he's still 22, he spent 12 years in Azkaban which didn't help him grow as a person, all he remembers before Azkaban are his friends, so he wants to hold on to them as long as possible. And yes, he is handsome and sexy, even JKR admits it. I read in an other post a suggestion about him being gay, that's just not right, he's very manly, and I bet that if he hadn't spent 12 years in jail, he would be married by now and with a bunch of kids (Hmm, Harry would have 'cousins'). I don't think Lupin is gay either, he's just an unlucky guy who because his werewolf condition has never found his significant other. > As for Lupin killing him, are you mad? Dumbledore > didn't want him dead in the first place, he 'believes > in second chances', he surely thought, as he did for > Snape, that the past can be fought and beaten. But Lupin hasn't even used his first chance, because I don't think not telling DD about the marauders becoming animagus is a huge mistake, nobody got hurt. So what's his first chance? Becoming a werewolf? Nope, it's not like he did it on purpose. Sirius may have doubted about him 14 years ago, but it was only for a brief period of time. Since he's the only one left from the marauders, he may start looking more after Harry. > Dumbledore trusted Sirius. And if we can't trust > Dumbledore, we can't trust anyone... > Don't you agree? Hermione is a bright girl, but remember she said this about Snape? And still Harry doesn't trust him, but I do, as I trust Sirius and Harry did. Juli From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Thu Nov 18 01:02:34 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2004 01:02:34 -0000 Subject: Occlumency: Relax or resist? (Was: CHAPTER DISCUSSION: Chapter 29, Career Ad In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118096 Carol (earlier): > > > > If we could eliminate the concept of martial-arts based relaxation, it would help to eliminate a great deal of confusion. No analogies, please; > Lupinlore responded: > Why not? After all, argument from analogy is often insightful and > quite useful. I grant you it has its flaws, but so do all argument > forms. Carol (earlier): > > Again, if you want to persuade me that I'm mistaken, you can't just snip my arguments and sweep them all away with your own opinion. > Lupinlore responded: > I think we are talking past each other here, Carol. I'm not trying > to persuade anyone that they are mistaken. As I believe Kneasy has > observed, if you look at the history of discussion threads on this > list, particularly with regard to Snape, almost no one changes their > mind about anything (Siriusly Snapey Susan being about the only > exception). The only person who ever moves anyone is JKR herself, > and I suspect that is the case in this instance. Until she issues as > definitive ruling, if she ever does, those of us who believe Snape > was a semi-hysterical, hypocritical sadist in Occlumency will not be > phased by any number of quotes or argumentation, and the same goes > for those who have a more positive view of him. > Carol (earlier): > You have to actually answer them using canon and logic. (Analogies don't prove anything and are in fact a logical fallacy.) > > Oh, of course analogies are a valid way of arguing. As I said above, > they have their weakness, but so do all argument forms, including > those based on quotes, which after all may be taken out of context, > misinterpreted, or otherwise misused in any number of ways. > > So, to answer you in the same vein that you answered me, if you don't > find what I said persuasive, I'm not at all surprised, as I wasn't > trying to persuade you. If you don't like analogies and prefer > quotes, that is of course your right. However, please, and I mean > this politely, don't expect everyone on this list to conform to your > ideas of what an argument should or should not look like. > Carol responds: I was only objection to your sweeping assertion that I was wrong and to your snipping my entire post without answering my arguments. Analogies, while useful to clarify or illustrate a point, can't prove the point because the two things being compared (martial arts and Occlumency, Voldemort and Hitler, etc.) are not identical. The only evidence we have to support our points is the text itself (canon). That's what we do on this list--present an argument or a theory, support it with canon, and seek responses to it. If you are unwilling to examine the evidence for fear that it will contradict your view of Snape, that of course is your privilege. I ask only that if you're going to argue that my canon support is inadequate that you produce your own canon support to oppose it. Fair is fair, and there is really no other way to discuss a literary work than to examine the text of that work. In any case, please don't assume that I'm wrong just because you disagree with me, and please have the courtesy not to snip my entire post (or anyone else's), because the post becomes lost when you do so and no one else has a chance to respond to it. My apologies for saying that you "have to" do such and such; what I meant was that a valid argument requires that its points be supported by evidence and that the counterarguments presented by the other side be fairly and completely answered, not labeled incorrect and snipped away. Carol, who taught college composition and literary analysis for eighteen years and really does know what constitutes a valid argument From nrenka at yahoo.com Thu Nov 18 01:12:33 2004 From: nrenka at yahoo.com (nrenka) Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2004 01:12:33 -0000 Subject: Occlumency: Relax or resist? (Was: CHAPTER DISCUSSION: Chapter 29, Career Ad In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118097 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" wrote: > Carol responds: > I ask only that if you're going to argue that my canon support is > inadequate that you produce your own canon support to oppose it. > Fair is fair, and there is really no other way to discuss a > literary work than to examine the text of that work. The problem is, what's *really* being argued about here is not canon. Nope. It's about the proper interpretation of canon, because texts sure don't interpret themselves. (I had a delightful archaeology professor who noted that 'facts do not speak for themselves'--this is in his spirit. I hope.) I think I posted on this a while ago, but I'll compress it. I'm perfect happy to take it as canon that Snape says Harry must resist. That's canonical. What's interpretive, **on both sides of the argument**, is the discussion of HOW to resist. This is, in part, because there is no specification exactly of how to do this in the text. The martial arts stuff is an application of things that work in real life to the text, in an attempt to explain how one goes about establishing mental resistance, why a particular model of relaxation is ideal, and why it is understandable that Harry failed. It's not more canonical to say that Snape said X and Harry didn't do it and that's it and of story no explanation needed, because that has no more exegesis on method than the other position. There's no canonical explanation of method, therefore we must argue it out interpretively. And that's why one can argue against the position taken without having to cite chapter and verse of actual text to disagree with it. -Nora has also played in the interpretation of texts and other such fun spectator sports From bob.oliver at cox.net Thu Nov 18 01:35:14 2004 From: bob.oliver at cox.net (lupinlore) Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2004 01:35:14 -0000 Subject: Harry left at the Dursleys (Was Re: Plot in OotP) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118098 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "nrenka" wrote: > > > > Now, this doesn't fully address why Dumbledore didn't intervene > there, but I think we have more coming there per comments about his > letter to Petunia, and the coherent if ungratifying resort of how > Dumbledore doesn't *force* people. That is to say, he lets people > make their own mistakes. Yes, and this is actually what I meant, he supposedly loves Harry but left him at the Dursleys without interfering with their abuse. And you are right, the thing about not forcing people is coherent AND ungratifying, as it essentially makes him an accomplice through inaction. It is one thing to decide for yourself not to object to abuse. It is quite another to stand aside and let someone ELSE be abused, particularly a defenseless person and particularly a child. If it goes this way I would acknowledge that JKR has connected the dots, but not in a very skillful way if she truly wants us to believe that Dumbledore is "the epitome of goodness." But, as Alla says, we will have to see. Perhaps she will indeed manage to come up with some explanation that saves Dumbledore from looking either foolish or an accomplice. Lupinlore From bob.oliver at cox.net Thu Nov 18 01:49:45 2004 From: bob.oliver at cox.net (lupinlore) Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2004 01:49:45 -0000 Subject: Plot in OotP In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118099 sophierom wrote: >.... Dumbledore makes the most callous choices because he wants to > put wizardingkind above the happiness of one child. But, as the > relationship deepens, Dumbledore begins to love Harry so much that his > emotions interfere with good decision making. We're seeing the > decline of Dumbledore as we we see the rise of Harry and Voldemort. > It's kind of sad, really! Well, I could see this, except for JKR's comment about Dumbledore being "very wise" and "the epitome of goodness." This type of callous behavior doesn't strike me as very consistent with either. And if she has Harry simply forgiving him and saying "It's all right that you left me to be abused, I understand," I'm not so sure I won't throw the book against the wall. As for the other explanations you offer, I agree that they are all possible, but seem somewhat contrived. Still, we will have to see. Lupinlore From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Thu Nov 18 02:39:29 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2004 02:39:29 -0000 Subject: JKR's writing in OoP (was Re: Sirius's Future) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118100 annegirl wrote: > > > The point I'm trying to make is that if JKR had a plan for the significance of Sirius' death, she didn't pull it off. As a reader, I was not convinced that Sirius' death impacted Harry in some positive, life-lesson way. Cedric's death impacted me in a dramatic > > > way; Sirius' was contrived and obvious. << > > catkind responded: Why do deaths have to be significant or life-lessons? > > They aren't in Real Life, perhaps that is the point JKR was trying to make? No, Sirius' death doesn't make much sense, and that's exactly why I think it might be well written after all. > > Renee noted: > I seem to remember JKR saying somewhere that it was necessary for > Sirius to die and that we would find out why in the next book. OotP > is less of a standalone than the previous books, so it's perhaps a > bit premature to say it doesn't make sense. > Also, Sirius's death may not be overly dramatic, Harry's reaction to > it certainly is, and that's where the significance lies. Carol adds: Cedric's death didn't make much sense, either. Yes, he was in Voldy's way and for that reason "had" to be killed, but from Harry's standpoing, and the reader's, Cedric's death comes out of nowhere, just as Sirius's does. (Most deaths do, as Potioncat said in another post to this thread.) I think, however, that Sirius's death will be important from a thematic perspective, chiefly because Harry cared so much about him: a sad lesson Harry must learn about the unpredictability of life, the arbitrariness and cruelty of death, the suffering that Voldemort is inflicting on the world viewed from his personal perspective. Yes, Voldemort killed Harry's parents, but that was fifteen years ago as of HBP, and Harry never knew them, a point that is brought home when Rita Skeeter asks him how he thinks his parents would feel about his entering the TWT and he has no idea how to answer. In fact, he's annoyed by the question. In contrast, he knows exactly how Sirius would--and does--feel. Sirius, despite their brief acquaintance, is real to Harry in a way that his parents never were, and his death is a severe and unexpected blow. I've been taken to task for thinking that the living Sirius really had nothing more to contribute as a character, trapped as he was in his own depression and unable to offer much beyond bad advice to Harry and his home as headquarters for the Order. His miserable adult life was the tragic result of his own bad choices (the Secret Keeper switch and confronting Peter after Godric's Hollow chief among them), and his death was also the consequence of his own choices (going to the MoM rather than waiting for Dumbledore, taunting Bellatrix instead of viewing her as a serious threat). Please note that I'm not blaming him for trying to save Harry any more than I blame Harry for trying to save him, but both of them suffered for these seemingly right choices, and Sirius would be alive if either he or Harry had stayed away. Choices have consequences, and sometimes those consequences are painful. Sirius's death will, IMO, make it clear to Harry just what others in the WW have lost and will lose because of Voldemort and his Death Eaters, and it will help to prepare him for the other deaths that will inevitably follow. It will help him understand what his conflict with Voldemort is all about, and why he, Harry, must confront and defeat him. It will also help him to regard Voldemort as a real and deadly enemy, a point he has failed to grasp so far because through luck, fate, and the help of others, he has survived four encounters with the Dark Lord. (For the record, I realize that it was Bellatrix who killed Sirius, but she was doing it for Voldemort, as his henchwoman. And I think Harry will understand that, just as he realized that it was Voldemort who destroyed the Crouches' and the Longbottoms' lives.) If JKR brings Sirius back from behind the Veil, she will have tormented Harry for nothing, and she will deny him the lesson of the finality of death. Suppose that Sirius returns and then Ron is killed. Harry will expect him, too, to come back. That would be terrible for Harry and a cheat for the readers. Please, JKR. Let the dead remain dead. Don't give Harry or the readers false hope. Carol, back from California and trying to respond only to recent posts P.S. Hello to the new Carol and welcome to the list! From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Thu Nov 18 03:20:37 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2004 03:20:37 -0000 Subject: JKR's writing in OoP (was Re: Sirius's Future) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118101 Carol: > If JKR brings Sirius back from behind the Veil, she will have > tormented Harry for nothing, and she will deny him the lesson of the > finality of death. Suppose that Sirius returns and then Ron is killed. > Harry will expect him, too, to come back. That would be terrible for > Harry and a cheat for the readers. Please, JKR. Let the dead remain > dead. Don't give Harry or the readers false hope. > > Carol, back from California and trying to respond only to recent posts > Alla: Welcome back,Carol :o) Or, if JKR brings Sirius back, it may be for the reason unknown to us yet. It may be that he never was properly dead. Harry already learned the lesson the death is final (Cedric, his parents). I think it would be wonderful for Harry and at least this reader if the only father figure this boy ever knew reenters his life again :o) JKR planted the hints that Sirius may not be dead (different colour of the curse, no body, etc.) I don't see it as a cheat. So, please, JKR, please, please :o) From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Thu Nov 18 03:39:18 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2004 03:39:18 -0000 Subject: Harry left at the Dursleys (Was Re: Plot in OotP) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118102 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "lupinlore" wrote: snip. > Yes, and this is actually what I meant, he supposedly loves Harry but > left him at the Dursleys without interfering with their abuse. And > you are right, the thing about not forcing people is coherent AND > ungratifying, as it essentially makes him an accomplice through > inaction. It is one thing to decide for yourself not to object to > abuse. It is quite another to stand aside and let someone ELSE be > abused, particularly a defenseless person and particularly a child. > If it goes this way I would acknowledge that JKR has connected the > dots, but not in a very skillful way if she truly wants us to believe > that Dumbledore is "the epitome of goodness." > > But, as Alla says, we will have to see. Perhaps she will indeed > manage to come up with some explanation that saves Dumbledore from > looking either foolish or an accomplice. > Alla: Well, that is not exactly what I meant. It is a given that Dumbledore left Harry with Dursleys and if we believe what he said at the end of OOP (which I am inclined to), he loves Harry. So, I was asking whether you consider it to be good plotting or good "connecting of the dots" if the answer to the question why Dumbledore left Harry there to be abused will be simple - Dumbledore has to chose between Harry's survival and the abuse. Believe me, I am very upset with Dumbledore, but I don't see how it makes him bad person if he honestly thought that the only place Harry can survive will be Dursleys. To make a long story short - what do you think is better nickname for Dumbledore "the accomplice in Harry's abuse or "the accomplice in Harry's death"? From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Thu Nov 18 03:52:53 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2004 03:52:53 -0000 Subject: Occlumency: Relax or resist? (Was: CHAPTER DISCUSSION: Chapter 29, Career Ad In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118103 Nora: > The problem is, what's *really* being argued about here is not > canon. Nope. It's about the proper interpretation of canon, because > texts sure don't interpret themselves. (I had a delightful > archaeology professor who noted that 'facts do not speak for > themselves'--this is in his spirit. I hope.) Alla: LOL! Nora, I agree with you in this context, but I found the phrase "facts do not speak for themselves" really funny, because in the legal context facts often speak for themselves. Anyways, I agree with you, of course, I do. Interpretation is often the key, because canon quotes are very often not clear at all. Besides if we were only allowed to argue with DIRECT canon support , without interpretation, half of the theories would be deemed invalid right now :o) From jlnbtr at yahoo.com Thu Nov 18 02:48:24 2004 From: jlnbtr at yahoo.com (Juli) Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2004 18:48:24 -0800 (PST) Subject: What make a "Qualified Wizard"? In-Reply-To: <200411170849233.SM01284@DEVBOX> Message-ID: <20041118024824.68688.qmail@web53108.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 118104 --- Vivamus : > I'm trying to recall if there is anything in canon > about what makes a "qualified wizard". The only > thing I can think of (other than age) is the OWLs. > If that's so, that means Harry would no longer be > under the underage decree, wouldn't it? Actually after the OWLs kids aren't 'of age', legal age in the WW to do magic outside Hogwarts is 17, and since most of them take their OWLs at 15 or 16, they still have some time before becoming of age. Juli From foxmoth at qnet.com Thu Nov 18 04:07:21 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2004 04:07:21 -0000 Subject: Harry left at the Dursleys (Was Re: Plot in OotP) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118105 Nora: > > Now, this doesn't fully address why Dumbledore didn't intervene there, but I think we have more coming there per comments about his letter to Petunia, and the coherent if ungratifying resort of how Dumbledore doesn't *force* people. That is to say, he lets people make their own mistakes. Lupinlore: > Yes, and this is actually what I meant, he supposedly loves Harry but left him at the Dursleys without interfering with their abuse. And you are right, the thing about not forcing people is coherent AND ungratifying, as it essentially makes him an accomplice through inaction. It is one thing to decide for yourself not to object to abuse. It is quite another to stand aside and let someone ELSE be abused, particularly a defenseless person and particularly a child. > If it goes this way I would acknowledge that JKR has connected the dots, but not in a very skillful way if she truly wants us to believe that Dumbledore is "the epitome of goodness."< Pippin: That would only be true if you think there had to be a way that Dumbledore could have interfered and remained a good person as he sees it. This seems to me an objection about characterization or genre rather than plot. Tolkien said (paraphrasing) that in the world of faerie, one could imagine an ogre living in an ugly castle, because the evil of the ogre makes it so, but one could not imagine the home of a wise and benevolent king that was nonetheless sickeningly ugly. And yet, he added, in the real world, it would be amazing to find one that was not. Tolkien conceived of the magical world as a place where compromises were not only not inevitable but not possible, and Harry when he first arrives mistakes the wizarding world for such a place. But it isn't, as we should have known when we saw that Draco is just as welcome at Hogwarts as Harry is. Good and evil are more tangible in the wizarding world than they are in ours, but that doesn't make them more accessible to mortals. Indeed, it would be difficult for JKR to show the value of tolerance if she were simultaneously fantasizing about a world where compromise is synonymous with appeasement, as it is in Tolkien. Dumbledore can hold out for his high principles and fight the battle against evil alone (and inevitably lose) or he can work with those who agree that Voldemort is evil and want to see him defeated, even if their definition of goodness is not his. And really, judging by the way the Dursleys treat Dudley and Snape treats Draco, if they were ordered to be nice to Harry it wouldn't have helped at all. Bad enough to spoil a child out of excessive love, but to do it out of fear--I can't think of a better way to create a monster. But just as Dumbledore cannot chose the allies he would like, neither can Voldemort. I'm sure he would prefer to have an army of stone killers at his command. Instead he's got Malfoy. I really can't see Lucius drilling his cronies the way Harry did the DA. Sneak attacks, blackmail and poisoning are his style, with a spot of Muggle torture on the side; there was nothing in the job description about combat. It's no wonder he was defeated by an army of teenagers. Anyway, most armies are composed of teenagers, and some have been led by them. I'm not surprised the DE's didn't want to use AK - the guilty wand can be identified with priori incantato. Much better to use an incapacitating spell that leaves no trace. I didn't have any trouble wondering why the kids got into the ministry so easily either, since we were told in GoF that the impostor Moody had blasted obstacles out of Harry's way so he could get to the cup. As for Sirius, he was thought to be mad, so neither legilimency nor veritaserum would have established anything. Dumbledore is more logical than most wizards, but that time it betrayed him. His initial premise was faulty and so his conclusion was also. Sirius was the Secret-Keeper, only the Secret-Keeper could betray the secret, therefore only Sirius could have betrayed the Potters. QED. I can't really blame him for not doubting his premise either. It was Sirius and James themselves who misled him about who the Secret-Keeper was. Alas they did their job too well. Pippin From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Thu Nov 18 04:15:36 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2004 04:15:36 -0000 Subject: CHAPTER DISCUSSION: Chapter 31, O.W.L.s In-Reply-To: <20041115034946.39342.qmail@web53102.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118106 Discussion questions > > 1. Why was Draco Malfoy next to Harry during their Charms > exam? If they were called alphabetically, Draco must > have been called long before Harry. > Carol responds: Granted, there would be six people between Malfoy and Harry (Moon, Nott, Parkinson, the Patil twins, and Sally-Anne Perks, SS/PS Am. ed. 131), just as there were during the Sorting ceremony, but IIRC, we're told that Harry stepped up to an examiner who didn't have a student with him at the moment. It's like being in line at a bank and going to the "next available teller," who will not necessarily be next to the teller serving the person in front of you. Or checking in your luggage at an airport (where they've now resorted to holding up signs to tell you which counter to go to). So Harry could easily have ended up next to Draco, who would be finishing his exam as Harry began his. Carol, wondering who Moon is From willsonkmom at msn.com Thu Nov 18 04:33:57 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2004 04:33:57 -0000 Subject: "Conjured" food (was Re: The Nature of Galleons) In-Reply-To: <200411170715482.SM01284@DEVBOX> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118107 > Vivamus: >snip > So kids from wizarding families would be using magic from the time they were > small in their own homes and families. Wizard kids in muggle families, of > course, would have different rules. Potioncat: But in OoP, at the Weasley household, it is stated that the trio have to hand carry dishes to the tables, but that the older members of the family (Bill and Charlie) can use magic. Then at some point, the twins use magic at every opportunity, even when Molly would prefer they didn't. From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Thu Nov 18 04:44:41 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2004 04:44:41 -0000 Subject: CHAPTER DISCUSSION: Chapter 31, O.W.L.s In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118108 annemehr wrote: 3. Will Harry get enough OWLS to continue his career as > > an Auror? > > Actually, I think he will. I think he underestimates his grades > generally, and I also think it's not necessary to get a *perfect* > grade on an OWL to achieve Outstanding. I think this just leaves room for him to squeak into Snape's NEWT potions class (I hope so, too). Carol sneaks in an "I agree." annemehr wrote: > > 4. If Fred and George only got about 3 OWLS each, what > > classes did they have during their 6th and 7th year? > > Only 3 classes? > > Let's see...Herbology, Charms, and DADA. Here's what the book says: in Ch. 12 they mention trying to sell extendable ears before Herbology. > In Ch. 15 they say Umbridge had inspected their Charms class. And back > in Ch. 9 they apparate into Ron and Harry's room wondering who'd set > the Slinkhard book, and in Ch. 25 Lee Jordan gets detention from > Umbridge because he points out to her that under the most recent > Decree, she couldn't tell off F&G for playing Exploding Snap in the > back of class, so they had DADA. That's all I could find. > > That's really not enough classes to fill a week, though; you suppose > Hogwarts has some "vocational" type classes you don't need to have > passed an OWL for, or do they just have a very light schedule? I'm > not surprised they don't have Potions; they arent' likely to have got an O in their OWL, though they may well have passed, and I'm sure they could do their own research as they needed it. Carol responds: I wonder if DADA is a required class for all students. In that case, the Twins could have taken Transfiguration as well as the three classes you mentioned without necessarily getting an OWL in that subject. It seems to me that Charms, Potions, and Transfiguration would be the classes most useful for their joke shop, and we know that Fred, at least, displayed a talent for Transfiguration through wandless accidental magic when he was all of five. It's also possible, as other posters have suggested, that their three OWLs apiece were in different subjects. Maybe George got one in Herbology, Fred got one in Potions, and they both got one in Potions and DADA. It's a safe bet, however, that neither of them got an OWL in Astronomy, Divination, or History of Magic. Carol From willsonkmom at msn.com Thu Nov 18 04:51:38 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2004 04:51:38 -0000 Subject: Harry left at the Dursleys (Was Re: Plot in OotP) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118109 > Alla: > > Well, that is not exactly what I meant. It is a given that > Dumbledore left Harry with Dursleys and if we believe what he said > at the end of OOP (which I am inclined to), he loves Harry. > > So, I was asking whether you consider it to be good plotting or > good "connecting of the dots" if the answer to the question why > Dumbledore left Harry there to be abused will be simple - Dumbledore > has to chose between Harry's survival and the abuse. > > Believe me, I am very upset with Dumbledore, but I don't see how it > makes him bad person if he honestly thought that the only place > Harry can survive will be Dursleys. > > To make a long story short - what do you think is better nickname > for Dumbledore "the accomplice in Harry's abuse or "the accomplice > in Harry's death"? Potioncat: In SS/PS Dumbledore seemed to be an all knowing all powerful wizard. The older Harry gets, the less Dumbledore knows (just like kids and their parents in RL) I agree with Alla. The safest place for Harry was with the Dursleys and DD had little control over what happened there. I don't think he had any idea how bad it was until Harry came to Hogwarts. And even then, I don't think he knew how really bad it was. From snow15145 at yahoo.com Thu Nov 18 04:51:13 2004 From: snow15145 at yahoo.com (snow15145) Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2004 04:51:13 -0000 Subject: Harry left at the Dursleys (Was Re: Plot in OotP) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118110 Alla: So, I was asking whether you consider it to be good plotting or good "connecting of the dots" if the answer to the question why Dumbledore left Harry there to be abused will be simple - Dumbledore has to chose between Harry's survival and the abuse. Snow: I agree! Where `could' Harry have lived, the Dursleys or with a wizarding family? This reminds me so much of the child who is home schooled or in a private school for their protection of the cruelty (among many other factors) that defiantly lies within. What happens to this child when they are not welcomed into the real world after that schooling or the reality of that world slaps them in the face? They are not street- smart, they don't recognize their adversaries because they didn't have to live among them or fear them or deal with them, they are like the kitten that has always been protected against the outside world that escaped one day and doesn't even know how to get back to where it belongs, Survival of the Fitness. It is never the easy road that makes you strong but the hard one. Where is the protection it is their life their choice such maybe the Dumbledore theory! Grow up hard. Everything didn't come to Harry on a silver spoon with the Dursleys in fact far from it. Was Harry protected No But if Harry would have been allowed the privileges of growing up in the world he was born to what might he have been another Tom Riddle or a Malfoy? Harry's parents aren't physically there for him but somehow; someway Dumbledore has appointed himself guardian over Harry. This man, who has been acknowledged as the epitome of goodness, has not put Harry in the private school atmosphere but allowed him to face much much more because Dumbledore knows! Snow P.S. To all home school mothers and private school mothers who are offended and would like to respond in defense of my post in this matter please email me @ kking0731 at hotmail.com I will be more than happy to respond. From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Thu Nov 18 05:07:03 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2004 05:07:03 -0000 Subject: Harry left at the Dursleys (Was Re: Plot in OotP) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118112 Snow: snip. It is never the easy road that makes you strong but the hard one. Where is the protection it is their life their choice such maybe the Dumbledore theory! Grow up hard. Everything didn't come to Harry on a silver spoon with the Dursleys in fact far from it. Was Harry protected No But if Harry would have been allowed the privileges of growing up in the world he was born to what might he have been another Tom Riddle or a Malfoy? > snip. Alla: Sorry, but big NO again. The only thing I was arguing is the > necessity for Dumbledore to choose lesser evil from two - for Harry to be dead or alive but abused. If you are arguing that Dumbledore put Harry with Dursleys for the reason of " not spoiling him" and teaching him some life lesson, such Dumbledore gets ZERO sympathy from me. Abuse is NOT a life lesson, which needs to be given to a child and I would argue that child SHOULD be protected from such lessons if it is possible at all. The only justification for Dumbledore in mind would be that he did not want to see Harry dead. Some would argue that it is better to risk Harry's physical survival by putting him with loving family of powerful wizards than to leave him with Dursleys and I see their argument as quite strong too. Potioncat: snip. I agree with Alla. The safest place for Harry was with the Dursleys and DD had little control over what happened there. I don't think he had any idea how bad it was until Harry came to Hogwarts. And even then, I don't think he knew how really bad it was. > Alla: I think he knew how bad it was (I watched you more closely than you knew, remember?) and I want to slap him for not interfering, but if the place was indeed the SAFEST, then I can forgive him. From jlnbtr at yahoo.com Thu Nov 18 04:28:29 2004 From: jlnbtr at yahoo.com (Juli) Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2004 20:28:29 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups]Re: Harry left at the Dursleys (Was Re: Plot in OotP) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041118042829.510.qmail@web53103.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 118113 I believe the reason is plain and clear, DD needed Lily's blood to keep him safe as he explains at the end of OoP, he must have done some aditional protection spells to keep No 4 Privet Drive completly safe, Petunia seems to know this, she told Harry to stay inside the house after the dementores attacked him. I think it was terribly hard for DD to watch as he was bullied by Dudley and his friends, and as he was forced to sleep under the stairs, but he restrained himself because he knew that if he as a wizard interfered it could get Harry kicked out and that would mean his death, so he made a choice, his life over his wellbeing. DD loves Harry and looks after him, he is helping him become a good man, and preparing him to face Voldemort in the final battle. DD may make mistakes, after all he's only human, but he's still trustworthy, he's a good man who's trying to do his best at difficult times. Juli __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? The all-new My Yahoo! - Get yours free! http://my.yahoo.com From jlnbtr at yahoo.com Thu Nov 18 04:39:57 2004 From: jlnbtr at yahoo.com (Juli) Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2004 20:39:57 -0800 (PST) Subject: CHAPTER DISCUSSION: Chapter 31, O.W.L.s In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041118043957.31798.qmail@web53104.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 118114 > Discussion questions > > > > 1. Why was Draco Malfoy next to Harry during their > > Charms exam? If they were called alphabetically, > > Draco must have been called long before Harry. > > > Carol responds: > Granted, there would be six people between Malfoy > and Harry (Moon, Nott, Parkinson, the Patil twins, > and Sally-Anne Perks, SS/PS Am. ed. 131), just as > there were during the Sorting ceremony, but IIRC, > we're told that Harry stepped up to an examiner who > didn't have a student with him at the moment. > So Harry could easily have ended up next to Draco, > who would be finishing his exam as Harry began his. That was my first thought, but how many examiners were there? I don't think more than 6 or 7. I don't think the kids would be called if there wasn't an available examiner. I don't remember who was Harry called with, but I think there were about 5 or 6 (sorry no canon). But maybe the reason is that JKR wanted it that way, and it's her world and she can do whatever she wants, she wanted Draco to fail or at least get a bad grade because he got distracted looking at Harry. I just loved that scene, Draco is busy looking as Harry is admired by his professor and then he blows up his exam. Well deserved. Juli From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Thu Nov 18 05:17:18 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2004 05:17:18 -0000 Subject: [HPforGrownups]Re: Harry left at the Dursleys (Was Re: Plot in OotP) In-Reply-To: <20041118042829.510.qmail@web53103.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118115 Juli wrote: > I think it was terribly hard for DD to watch as > he was bullied by Dudley and his friends, and as he > was forced to sleep under the stairs, but he > restrained himself because he knew that if he as a > wizard interfered it could get Harry kicked out and > that would mean his death, so he made a choice, his > life over his wellbeing. > Alla: As I said , if this is the reason, which I am inclined to agree with, I will buy it. I will buy Dumbledore's sufferings because he sees Harry abused and cannot interfere in fear for his life. What I don't buy is that Dumbledore who left Harry with Dursleys for the purpose of teaching him a lesson that life is hard and children are abused in such life all the time, can be called a wise man and "epithome of goodness". Juli: DD may make mistakes, after all > he's only human, but he's still trustworthy, he's a > good man who's trying to do his best at difficult > times. Alla: I tend to agree . From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Thu Nov 18 05:26:11 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2004 05:26:11 -0000 Subject: HP: Mystery or Adventure? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118116 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Renee" wrote: > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "lupinlore" > wrote: > > > > > > The words "mystery" and "adventure" are often used to characterize > > the HP saga. However, these two kinds of stories have quite > > different characteristics. I wonder if much of the argument over > HP > > in fan circles has to do with whether one approaches it more as a > > mystery or more as an adventure? > > > > > Personally, I think HP moves between mystery and adventure. > However, > > it is likely that there are times when we think JKR is writing > > adventure that she is engaged in crafting a mystery, and also many > > times when we are sure we are dealing with a mystery of great > import > > when in fact JKR is giving us an adventure story. Thus arise a > good > > many of our confusions and disappointments. And thus arise a good > > many of our criticisms of JKR, that is we often feel she has > played > > dirty with mysteries when she was writing adventure, and we often > > expect because she was doing one thing in a particular > circumstance > > she will do it in another (i.e. if x is important why isn't y?). > > > > Renee: > You've got some very good points here. I hope I'm not making things > more confusing by adding a third genre to the mix: fantasy. Though > it's obvious the HP saga isn't a conventional fantasy tale set in > some never-never land, it contains elements usually not found in > mysteries or conventional adventure stories, such as magic and non- > human sentient beings. Also, fantasy tales often make abundant use > of symbolism and archetypes, and it seems to me HP is no different > in this respect. It is, for instance, particularly strong in - > (medieval Christian) symbolism: phoenix, stag, unicorns and snake > (the basilisk). Harry frequently descends into the underworld to > resurface more or less victoriously. Many characters have symbolical > names. Etc. > > And it doesn't stop at mystery, adventure story and fantasy: the > books also have a satirical element demanding an approach of its > own, and I'm sure others could come up with different genres yet. In > short, to analyse and interpret the books the way they deserve, it > won't do to slap a label on them and then proceed to unravel them in > terms of that particular genre alone; they have to many layers. The > ideal interpretation, IMO, would be one that does justice to all the > different elements these books are composed of and succeeds in > harmonising them. > > Renee Carol adds: It's also a bildungsroman, a novel of growing up, which most inconveniently requires the main character and his friends to grow and develop and change, not at all in keeping with the requirements of either a mystery or an adventure/epic/fantasy/heroic quest, where the plot is more important than the characters. Carol, with apologies for oversimplification From willsonkmom at msn.com Thu Nov 18 05:29:57 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2004 05:29:57 -0000 Subject: CHAPTER DISCUSSION: Chapter 31, O.W.L.s In-Reply-To: <20041118043957.31798.qmail@web53104.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118117 Juli: snip > But maybe the reason is that JKR wanted it that way, > and it's her world and she can do whatever she wants, > she wanted Draco to fail or at least get a bad grade > because he got distracted looking at Harry. I just > loved that scene, Draco is busy looking as Harry is > admired by his professor and then he blows up his > exam. Well deserved. > Potioncat: Sorry, I can't man the canon at this moment. But I remember this as the one time I felt sorry for Draco. Yeah, he's a rotten kid, and it's fun to see bad things happen to rotten kids, but it would be better for consequences to follow misdeeds rather than happen randomly later. Being distracted from your own test is no fun nor fair. Although the WW is less fair than the RW. And this struck me (if memory serves, and it usually doesn't) as a classic Severus/James scenario. Of course, we also hear about Harry and others messing up in portions of the tests. Potioncat (who still enjoys the memory of ferret!Draco even though she shouldn't.) From foxmoth at qnet.com Thu Nov 18 05:33:19 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2004 05:33:19 -0000 Subject: JKR's writing in OoP (was Re: Sirius's Future) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118118 > Alla: > > Welcome back,Carol :o) > > Or, if JKR brings Sirius back, it may be for the reason unknown to us yet. It may be that he never was properly dead. Harry already learned the lesson the death is final (Cedric, his parents). > > I think it would be wonderful for Harry and at least this reader if > the only father figure this boy ever knew reenters his life again :o) > JKR planted the hints that Sirius may not be dead (different colour of the curse, no body, etc.) I don't see it as a cheat.< > > So, please, JKR, please, please :o) Pippin: Many children have to lose their fathers in war--and who can give them back? Not JKR. I think it would be awful if, having told us for years that a major character was going to die in OOP, she said, "Oops! Not properly dead, he's just restin''" When HBP begins, Sirius will have been gone only a month or so, while the readers will have had two or three years, at least, to adjust. It would seem strange if Harry was still in denial, while we have all gotten over the shock. By making it possible for us to deny his death if we wish, JKR is making sure at least some of us will be in the same place emotionally as Harry, still struggling to adjust to a world where Sirius is gone forever. Harry hasn't had to do that before. He didn't know when his parents died that they would never return, and Cedric's loss, though painful, didn't leave an empty space in Harry's life. Pippin From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Thu Nov 18 05:50:08 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2004 05:50:08 -0000 Subject: JKR's writing in OoP (was Re: Sirius's Future) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118119 > Pippin: > Many children have to lose their fathers in war--and who can give > them back? Not JKR. I think it would be awful if, having told us for > years that a major character was going to die in OOP, she said, > "Oops! Not properly dead, he's just restin''" Alla: We'll just have to agree to disagree on this one then. I do believe that JKR markets her books really well and while I would prefer that she would not say that prior to OOP hitting the book stores, I see nothing awful in Sirius' resurrection. As I said there are many deaths in the books who are final. If this is not death in the first place, there are no parallels with reality and inevitability of death in the first place. I trust that JKRcan pull it off believably, if not, oh well, there is always fanfiction :) From willsonkmom at msn.com Thu Nov 18 06:21:59 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2004 06:21:59 -0000 Subject: JKR's writing in OoP (was Re: Sirius's Future) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118120 > > Pippin: > > Many children have to lose their fathers in war--and who can give > > them back? Not JKR. I think it would be awful if, having told us > for > > years that a major character was going to die in OOP, she said, > > "Oops! Not properly dead, he's just restin''" > > > > Alla: > > We'll just have to agree to disagree on this one then. > I do believe that JKR markets her books really well and while I > would prefer that she would not say that prior to OOP hitting the > book stores, I see nothing awful in Sirius' resurrection. > > > As I said there are many deaths in the books who are final. If this > is not death in the first place, there are no parallels with reality > and inevitability of death in the first place. I trust that JKRcan > pull it off believably, if not, oh well, there is always > fanfiction :) Potioncat: I know we are not supposed to do "me too" posts, and I know JKR hasn't asked us to vote, but I really think Sirius, regretfully, is dead and he will stay dead. So I am with Pippin on this one. From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Thu Nov 18 06:53:14 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2004 06:53:14 -0000 Subject: The length of the Pensieve Scene In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118121 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "curlyhornedsnorkack" wrote: > > > curlyhornedsnorkack wrote : > > "What Snape was doing during the scenes before he was spotted by the > > Marauders was not innocent and harmless; he was being a sneak." > > > > Del replies : > > ...So can you back your > > allegations with canon ? > > > Yes. There are some staightforward tidbits. > -In the scene, the sun is shining. Lots of people are going out to > enjoy the great outdoors. The Marauders choose the shade of a beech > tree, which allows quite a bit of sun through the leaves. Snape > chooses the "dense shadow of a clump of bushes". If you prefer dense > shadow, the best place to stay is indoors. > > -When Snape is in the dense shade, Harry isn't studying Snape to see > whether he is really looking at the exam questions, so we can't see > what he's doing. But when Snape's nickname is called, Harry thinks > that Snape looks like he has been expecting an attack. > > Other clues depend a lot on what one believes to be true about the > pensieve. First off, it seems clear from discussions on the pensieve > that we can't really pin down how the pensive works; I think it > enhances memories; it doesn't create new ones. For example, In DD's > memories from the pensieve in GOF, the details seem related to a train > of thought. In Harry's first peak into the pensieve(GOF),when Harry > sees the "Judgement" Room, all details enhance the somberness of the > trials. In the memory with the Celebrity Leo Bagman, Rita Skeeter in > all her glory makes an appearance, but she would be expected to be > present in a celebrity trial. In DD's memories of Bertha Jorkins and > Sybill Trelawney (OOTP), Harry only sees their bodies, not their > surroundings. So it seems likely that the pensieve works by fleshing > out the details that makes a memory more real- not by creating extra > scenes. > > -If Snape is so engrossed in his exam questions, he could not > incorporate into his memory words he couldn't hear. He would be too > busy to have any awareness of whole discussions. But Snape manages to > incorporate into his memory a discussion that is heard behind another > group of people. In comparison, as far as we can tell, Harry only > hears undistinguished chattering and laughing from the girls nearby. > (I wonder whether Snape had a version of extendable ears.) > > -Snape and the Marauders are about Harry's age in the scene, so, > assuming that Snape and the Marauders started in the same year, they > have had time to get to know each other pretty well. Lupin tells Harry > later that James and Snape have hated each other from the start. Yet > Snape just happens to stay close enough to his enemies to hear the > conversation, and, when they stride off across a lawn (I think we > can assume there is no path) he happens to go in the same direction. > > Finally, we have to examine Snape's reasons for hiding such a long > memory from Harry. If Snape doesn't care about the early part of the > memory, why would he hide it from Harry? Perhaps hiding his snooping > ways from Harry was important to Snape. It's interesting to me that in > this case Snape would not realize that Harry is more interested in > watching his father and his friends interact than watching Snape > snoop. > > Anyway, Snape's actions seem pretty suspicious to me. > > curlyhornedsnorkack Carol responds: I don't want to repeat what I've said in previous posts, but the Pensieve appears to be an objective record of what really happened, not dependent on what the person whose memory it is actually saw and heard. Otherwise there would be no need to consult it; in fact, it would be useless. But there are apparently at least two ways of using it; sifting the memory so it rises out of the bowl (Snape or Trelawney speaking) or actually entering the memory, which then becomes concrete and tangible--Harry can walk around or sit in a chair. He might even have been able to touch one of the people in those memories or smell the flowers, if there were any, or feel the warmth of the sun. As far as I can see, Severus is doing nothing wrong in the early part of the memory. He is writing detailed exam answers and then studying the questions to be sure he got them right. For some reason, the DADA exam was very important to him, and this information is an integral part of the memory, both from Snape's perspective and from JKR's. I see nothing suspicious in Snape's actions here. They're both natural and in character. (I do think he may have wanted a good reason to end the Occlumency lessons, which clearly weren't working, but that's another topic.) I think Snape is angry that Harry has seen him humiliated, angrier still that he has violated his privacy and shown himself untrustworthy, and perhaps afraid that Harry has seen the other memories that he deposited in the Pensieve as well. What were those memories? Did they relate to his DE days or to his defection from the DEs to Dumbledore? That, to me, is the important question. Carol, who thinks that Snape was dealing with the Inquisitorial Squad, talking to Dumbledore, marking homework, and prowling the hallways during the missing five hours (wrong thread, I know) From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Thu Nov 18 07:32:14 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2004 07:32:14 -0000 Subject: Plot in OotP In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118122 Hickengruendler wrote: > > > > In a few recent posts, I read the opinion by some posters, that > OotP has let Plot than the previous books. I think OotP was a very well plotted book, with one incident consequently leading to another. > -carolcaracciolo wrote: > > My biggest gripe with OOTP was not necessarily that JKR had left > dots unconnected but with the WAY she connected them. The dialogue, > in many spots, seemed stilted, awkward and, as Aura so aptly put > it, "soapy." It just didn't feel like JKR was as "in touch" with > her characters as she was in previous novels. Like I said in my > previous post, the novel feels like a foggy memory. The writing was > not NEARLY as compelling as her previous work. The device of "the > near-miss" death scenes added a cheesy-ness (is that a word?) that I > would NEVER dream of attributing to JKR. I was left feeling > disappointed with what I viewed as a lack of craftsmanship. Maybe > more time and another re-write would have helped? Does JKR work > with the same editor for each book? I really hope HBP hits the high > notes that GoF did... > > Carol > Now feeling very dejected...and wanting to re-read GoF in the worst > way! Carol (justcarol) responds: I liked Hickengruendler's cause/effect connections, which the other Carol snipped, yet somehow I agree with Carol C. that OoP is awkward and less compelling than the previous books. It's too long, for one thing, and as Del was saying a few weeks ago, Harry is, well, too full of anger, too unreasonable, for many readers to identify or sympathize with. (I think its Voldie's venomous influence as well as Harry's own burdens and frustrations, but that doesn't mean that I enjoy seeing him depicted as a self-righteous bully.) I wouldn't call the dream where Arthur is attacked by a snake and nearly dies "cheesy"; near-deaths can be moving and this one did move the plot forward, with Harry's fear of possession, Bode's plant, and a chance to glimpse Alice Longbottom. (I hope that Alice the dog-faced woman was not just a Mark Evans, dropped in as a bit of background.) My problem wit OoP is that there's just too much to remember, and the time frame isn't really clear. (I think Neri has made too much of the missing five hours of Snape's time on the night of the DoM battle--after all, Harry can't know what Snape was doing and we have DD's word that Snape acted as quickly as he could--but the fact that there seems to be a discrepancy between the time frame for Snape and the time frame for Harry does seem to suggest that JKR didn't set up a chart or outline so that *she* knew what Snape was doing. It's like the carelessness regarding wands in the graveyard scene of GoF: How can Harry be holding his wand *and* the portkey in one hand and dragging Cedric's body with the other? Only in OoP, that carelessness or confusion is more extensive. In the MoM scene, for example, it's very hard to tell what's going on. Harry's confusion (not knowing which DE is which in many cases, or what spell is being cast) is reflected by the narrator and consequently becomes the reader's confusion. The cleaning scenes with the doxies were just (IMO) boring, and I can't stand Umbridge or Grawp. And yet OoP is full of treasures, glimpses into the past that we haven't seen in other books (via Occlumency), hints at the future (Mrs. Weasley's boggart). JKR's usual balance of tension and humor is there, too--Lockhart in St. Mungo's and the twins with their swamp. I loved GoF, with its realistic quarrels among the friends and real tragedy, or rather pathos, with poor Cedric, and the close-up glimpses of Voldemort as he became, if not "greater and more terrible than ever," at least more real and more threatening, if it weren't for Harry's luck in the matter of the brother wands. OoP was disappointing as a sequel. I hope that HBP is better; shorter, more tightly and carefully plotted, more action-filled, more capable of arousing the reader's sympathies. And I hope it begins to answer our questions about everyone from Snape to Grindelwald, and especially about Godric's Hollow. I wonder, though, if we'll ever find out what happened during those missing twenty-four hours, or whether JKR even knows that they're missing. Carol, hoping that other list members can tell from the writing style or the Yahoo ID which Carol is which From Schlobin at aol.com Thu Nov 18 08:18:02 2004 From: Schlobin at aol.com (susanmcgee48176) Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2004 08:18:02 -0000 Subject: racism, sexism and sexual orientation in OoP and the rest of the Potterverse In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118123 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "dumbledore11214" wrote: > > Aura: > > > It's just not gonna happen. As much as I don't think JKR is > actively > > debunking R/S -- because I think she knows it's in her best > interest to > > let the fans have their fun -- I don't see her supporting it, > either. > > > Alla: > > Oh, but you see there is such thing as "silent admission" and I > think that this could be the case. You know, she is not explicitly > denying it, so maybe she agreeing with it? :o) > > > Aura: > snip. > > I'd > > rather my OTP be ignored than debunked, so I'm content with the > current > > equilibrium between JKR and the R/S shippers. > > > Alla: > > Well, true, but didn't we agree that she is doing a little bit more > than simply ignoring it? Of course it is not explicit at all, but we > can dream, can we? :) Well, I've read your analysis of Remus and Sirius... In reading it, I wonder if in fact Remus and Sirius were in fact lovers, or whether they were blood brothers.... As a lesbian, there are women who have loved me as a sister and a friend, but we were not lovers... There were women who loved me deeply but we never made love... It could be that Remus is gay, and Sirius is straight, and Remus was in love with Sirius and Sirius loved Lupin, but only as a brother... JKR will tell us...I do NOT think she cares AT ALL what the reactionary, homophobic American audience thinks at this point..she will be true to her vision... Given that she herself is heterosexual, she may not have envisioned same gender realationships, but then again, who knows? She is extraordinary, so we shall she... Susan From Schlobin at aol.com Thu Nov 18 08:19:29 2004 From: Schlobin at aol.com (susanmcgee48176) Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2004 08:19:29 -0000 Subject: racism, sexism and sexual orientation in OoP and the rest of the Potterverse In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118124 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "dumbledore11214" wrote: > > Aura: > > > It's just not gonna happen. As much as I don't think JKR is > actively > > debunking R/S -- because I think she knows it's in her best > interest to > > let the fans have their fun -- I don't see her supporting it, > either. > > > Alla: > > Oh, but you see there is such thing as "silent admission" and I > think that this could be the case. You know, she is not explicitly > denying it, so maybe she agreeing with it? :o) > > > Aura: > snip. > > I'd > > rather my OTP be ignored than debunked, so I'm content with the > current > > equilibrium between JKR and the R/S shippers. > > > Alla: > > Well, true, but didn't we agree that she is doing a little bit more > than simply ignoring it? Of course it is not explicit at all, but we > can dream, can we? :) Well, I've read your analysis of Remus and Sirius... In reading it, I wonder if in fact Remus and Sirius were in fact lovers, or whether they were blood brothers.... As a lesbian, there are women who have loved me as a sister and a friend, but we were not lovers... There were women who loved me deeply but we never made love... It could be that Remus is gay, and Sirius is straight, and Remus was in love with Sirius and Sirius loved Lupin, but only as a brother... JKR will tell us...I do NOT think she cares AT ALL what the reactionary, homophobic American audience thinks at this point..she will be true to her vision... Given that she herself is heterosexual, she may not have envisioned same gender realationships, but then again, who knows? She is extraordinary, so we shall she... Susan From bboyminn at yahoo.com Thu Nov 18 08:28:21 2004 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2004 08:28:21 -0000 Subject: DU treatment of Trelawney In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118125 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "kgpopp" wrote: > > Kathleen Hunt wrote: > > > I'm sorry if this has been covered in the past, but > > > I would like to know if any of you have a theory on > > > why Umbridge hated and picked on Trelawney? ... I don't > > > understand why DU went after her. Please let me know. > Juli: > > I think the reason DU picked on Trelawney was > > that she's a bad teacher, I mean she can't see the > > future even if her life depended on it, sure she's > > made 2 real prophecies, but I doubt DU knew anything > > about them. > Kristen: > I also agree that DU though Trelawney was a bad teacher. But more to > the point Trelawney was an easy target. DU was on a power trip, so > I think her motive was to get rid of people that were close to DD to > make it easier for her to have Hogwarts under her control. > > ...edited... Hagrid and Trelawney were easy target becuase they we > the least experianced teacher. McGonagall and Snape were trickery > as they were competent teachers. ...edited... > > Kristen bboyminn: I think Kristen is on the right track here. I think Umbridge picked Trelawney and Hagrid, because like any good bullies, they were the two who were least able to defend themselves. Although, I admit they were the least competent as well. Also, given Trelawney's limited abilities, I think Umbridge, like many of us, speculated the Trelawney was under Dumbledore's protection for some reason. Knowing the Dumbledore wanted and/or needed Trelawney near by, it was and easy way to undermine him. Trying to sack highly competent teachers like McGonagall and Snape would be very difficult because they are not only VERY much able to defend themselves magically, but also able to defend themselves intelectually. In reality, Umbridge has no real justification to sack any of the teachers. Her real motive was to undermine Dumbledore as much as possible. I'm not convinced that the Ministry of Magic truly runs Howgarts. I say they have the power to interfere at Hogwart because they represent the Law in the wizarding world, and as such, like any government can create excuses to interfere in any aspect of life. Any real world government by power of the ability to create self-serving laws is able to interfere with any aspect of the private life and business of it's citizens. But the true authorized long term control of Hogwarts is in the hands of the Headmaster and the private Board of Governors. It is conceivable the the Goverment has representatives on the Board of GOvernors to 'protect the public good', but beyond this and the normal 'power of law', I think Hogwarts is a completely private organization. Just a few thoughts. Steve/bboyminn (was bboy_mn) From bboyminn at yahoo.com Thu Nov 18 08:51:51 2004 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2004 08:51:51 -0000 Subject: Harry taking credit for what he didnt do... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118126 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "delwynmarch" wrote: > > TheMuffinMan wrote : > " The way Harry gloats in front of Draco, He tries to make it seem > like HE fought Voldie, when really when faced with the dark lord he > froze up and had to be saved by Dumbledore!" > Del comments : > > ...edited... > > 4. It's not so much the fact that Harry reminds Draco that he fought > LV that bothers me. It's the fact that he dismissed Draco so easily. > Harry's father made exactly the same kind of mistake : assuming that > someone couldn't be dangerous, and we know where it got him. I say > Harry had better be very careful and stop assuming Draco is no real > menace. Maybe Draco is really harmless, but maybe he's not. As Moody > would say : constant vigilance. > > Del bboyminn: Del has brought up a good, but separate point, Harry may be greatly underestimating Draco. But up to this point, Draco's attacks on Harry have been very much in the 'school boy' catagory, but now that he is truly mad, Draco's actions could very easily become much more serious. More importantly, I don't think this scene respesents Harry taking credit for anything. It's simply Harry refusing to be intimidated by Draco and friends. If Harry had make this statement in another context it would be cause for concern, but given Draco's attempt to intimidate, I think Harry's statements are reasonable in that context. Also, anyone who faces Voldemort while Voldemort has murderous intent towards them and survives to tell the tale has more than enough reasons to brag. Whether they actually defeat Voldemort or not, is not the point, to have simple been in the same room with a murderous Voldemort and survived is a miracle in itself. In that sense, when it is clear that there in no person on earth for whom Voldemort has greater murderous intent, Harry surviving every encounter with Voldemort when so very very very few have, is a monumental feat. Dumbledore says himself that Harry has face Voldemort and the Death Eaters with a courage and determination that VERY few adult wizards have shown. And again, to have survived so many encounter is an unprecedented feat, and one well worthy of pride and admiration. Just a few thoughts. Steve/bboyminn (was bboy_mn) From bboyminn at yahoo.com Thu Nov 18 09:37:31 2004 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2004 09:37:31 -0000 Subject: Pounds to Galleons (Was: Why did the founders...) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118127 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "hp_lexicon" wrote: > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Alina wrote: > > I'm not British, but the exchange rate doesn't seem unfair to me. > > Considering that one Galleon is a lot more money than one pound. > You can find an accurate Galleons-to-Muggle money convertor on the > Lexicon. It's located here: > > http://www.hp-lexicon.org/wizworld/galleons.html > > Steve > The Lexicon bboyminn: While not 100% accurate, a quick and easy exchange rate is - G1 = ?5 = $7.5 Not 100% accurate, but easy math; easy because the dollar value is 1.5 times the Pound value. So, using the above 'quick' ratios - One Phoenix/Holly wand = G10 = ?50 = $75 Omnoculars = G10 = ?50 = $75 One trip to Egypt = (assumed) G500 = ?2,500 = $3,750 One Daily Prophet Prize Drawing = G700 = ?3,500 = $5,250 One Knight Bus Ride = 11 Sickles = ?3.24 = $4.86 One Hogshead Butterbeer = 2 Sickles = ?0.59 = $0.89 Quite a while back JKR, in an interview, said that one Galleon was about 5 Pounds, and the Foreword in 'Quidditch Through the Ages' confirms that. The problem is that we have world standard references to give us the normal fluctuations in the value of the Pound relative to the US!Dollar, but we have no way of determining fluctuations in the Galleon to Pound ratio. So we are stuck with a roughly One to Five fixed ratio for G:?, and an ever fluctuating ratio for G:$. On the subject of cost and value, I always thought G10 for a wand was exceptionally cheap. Just a few thoughts. Steve/bboyminn (was bboy_mn) From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com Thu Nov 18 10:08:41 2004 From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (Barry Arrowsmith) Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2004 10:08:41 +0000 Subject: The Second Prophecy plus a correction Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118128 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "chrusotoxos" wrote: > Wh-what are you people THINKING about??! *splutters* Ok, for a book having nice jolts and fake clues, but I really think that here we're going out of HP and into Stephen King... *rolls her eyes* I really can't believe that someone out there is distrusting Sirius... > It's easy not to trust Sirius. And it's not a new idea, either, there've been doubts expressed almost from the day the site started. Just as a taster try these two posts (though there's lots more) - Sirius Reservations and Sirius Revisited - but take your blood pressure medication first. Or should that be anti-depressants? http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/79808 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/103685 Kneasy From Aisbelmon at hotmail.com Thu Nov 18 13:31:33 2004 From: Aisbelmon at hotmail.com (M.Clifford) Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2004 13:31:33 -0000 Subject: SNAPE the coward? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118129 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "chrusotoxos" wrote: > My guess is that JKR voluntarily misled us into considering Karkaroff as a coward, and therefore 'the coward'. She described him as a coward so many times only to be sure that when we'd see the word 'coward' again we'd have a Pavlovian thing and bark: 'Karkaroff'! But what if Voldemort sees SNAPE as the coward, and Karkaroff as the traitor? Valky: Hello Chrusotoxos welcome to the group! WOW what an awesome insightful post!!! HELLO listmembers! OVER HERE!!!!! Why are you guys not answering this? I am impressed, you are the first person I have seen with this theory, you original, you. I completely see your sense, utterly. I had a similar thought, but not as good, that DD trusts Snape because Snape is in his protection, simple as that. Basically Snape needs a way out of Voldies gang but with out DD he's mince. But I was scared to say it because I figured justcarol, and sssusan would lynch me, lol ;P Anyway, I like your reasoning, chrusotoxos, what else have you got? :D From madettebeau at gmail.com Thu Nov 18 13:37:32 2004 From: madettebeau at gmail.com (madlysarcastic) Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2004 13:37:32 -0000 Subject: Trophy Room (Re: Canon times two) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118130 Potioncat: > I'm way too experienced to ask this, but I will anyway. Have we > discussed whether the awards on JKR's site are canon? Maddy: I can't rightly say whether or not it's been discussed here or not, considering my posting and reading here tends to be sporadic, but I have done a bit of an analysis of the trophy room which can be found here: http://www.veritaserum.com/columns/hp-files/08-12-04-hermione.shtml =) Maddy From Aisbelmon at hotmail.com Thu Nov 18 13:50:32 2004 From: Aisbelmon at hotmail.com (M.Clifford) Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2004 13:50:32 -0000 Subject: Trophy Room (Re: Canon times two) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118131 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "madlysarcastic" wrote: > > Potioncat: > > > I'm way too experienced to ask this, but I will anyway. Have we > > discussed whether the awards on JKR's site are canon? > > Maddy: > > I can't rightly say whether or not it's been discussed here or not, Valky: It certainly should be, in my opinion. It's all canon as far as i am concerned, and technically I think that it falls under the rule of website content which is free range for us. From willsonkmom at msn.com Thu Nov 18 14:16:30 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2004 14:16:30 -0000 Subject: SNAPE the coward? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118132 "chrusotoxos" wrote: snip But what if Voldemort sees SNAPE as the coward, > and Karkaroff as the traitor? > > > Valky: snip I had a similar thought, but > not as good, that DD trusts Snape because Snape is in his > protection, simple as that. Basically Snape needs a way out of > Voldies gang but with out DD he's mince. Potioncat: It works very well either way and strong arguments have been made for both views. JKR tells us that many have figured it out, but of course she doesn't tell us who has the right answer. I think it's safe to say the 3 individuals are Crouch JR, Snape and Karkaroff. (Although someone will disagree.) Is Snape set up for punishment or death?" And how will he survive? From carolynwhite2 at aol.com Thu Nov 18 14:19:48 2004 From: carolynwhite2 at aol.com (carolynwhite2) Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2004 14:19:48 -0000 Subject: SNAPE the coward? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118133 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "M.Clifford" wrote: > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "chrusotoxos" > wrote: > > > My guess is that JKR voluntarily misled us into considering > Karkaroff as a coward, and therefore 'the coward'. She described him > as a coward so many times only to be sure that when we'd see the > word 'coward' again we'd have a Pavlovian thing and > bark: 'Karkaroff'! But what if Voldemort sees SNAPE as the coward, > and Karkaroff as the traitor? > > > Valky: > Hello Chrusotoxos welcome to the group! > WOW what an awesome insightful post!!! > HELLO listmembers! OVER HERE!!!!! Why are you guys not answering > this? > I am impressed, you are the first person I have seen with this > theory, you original, you. > I completely see your sense, utterly. Erm...you are joking Valky? The idea was first mentioned back in July 2000, see this old Yahoo Club message: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups-Archives/message/3797 It has been discussed very extensively at regular intervals since then, see: 15274, 15775 17331, 17575 18236 19935 22922, 22959 just for starters. Much of the early debate about Snape's status/DE or not was pulled together in this FP: http://www.hpfgu.org.uk/faq/snape.html Not that the subject is not worth discussing again, and endlessly, but worth looking up past arguments first. Carolyn From spotthedungbeetle at hotmail.com Thu Nov 18 14:38:28 2004 From: spotthedungbeetle at hotmail.com (dungrollin) Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2004 14:38:28 -0000 Subject: The Second Prophecy In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118134 > Kneasy again: > > Q. Is Voldy greater and more terrible than ever? > > A. Like hell he is. He's in hiding along with the mad bitch and > > his backing band is in the slammer. > > Dungrollin: > And Sirius is now dead. In which case, hasn't he left it a little > late to be giving a helping hand on achieving greatness and > terribleness surpassing previous efforts? > > Or... You're not in sad denial too, are you...? > > Dungrollin > Who's not so fond of smileys, but feels that a couple may be > appropriate after that last comment... Kneasy replied: Never use those 'emoticons' myself, either. Horrible things. But SAD DENIAL? Arrgh! What an abominable accusation! Nearly dropped my FEATHERBOA, the one with ESE!Sirius motifs cunningly juxtaposed with RIP!Harry badges. No; since we're going to hear more about Sirius I reckon there'll be a holdover - something he did in the past that'll cause big trouble for Harry in the future. An unwelcome legacy, if you like. If I'm wrong, I'm wrong, but I can sit here dreaming dreams of foul deeds, betrayal and other happy thoughts. Kneasy Dungrollin: Well, that's a relief. Oh all right then, I'll have to admit that it is possible. Lets assume there is a hypothetical something that Sirius did, which will help Voldy's cause enough to qualify Sirius for the servant. It has to have occurred between the end of PoA and the end of OotP. The suggestions you gave in your original post (117972) don't wash: "Voldy wants the Prophesy globe; how would an agent help there? By claiming sole guardian rights over Harry. By encouraging Harry's rashness. By influencing Harry against Snape's Occlumency. Or by being deliberately ambiguous (or by being deliberately *not* ambiguous) to Kreacher. Or by making sure that you'll be noticed by Malfoy while animaging about Kings Cross against the wishes of everybody with an ounce of sense. Passing a message? "Yes, I'm around; yes I'm close to Harry." Useful stuff for the Voldy clique." None of that increased Voldy's greatness or terribleness, either at the time, or potentially for the future; (unless you include cack- handed execution of plans under `terrible'). We're talking something seriously malign here. Something nasty. Real, genuine, honest (?) treachery. For which we seem to have no clues. Perhaps there's something vile and perfidious about the two-way mirror... Don't suppose you can be any more specific about these dreams you're having? Dungrollin Who can assure SSSusan that it's been grey and gloomy ever since she made that foolish comment about the sunshine, and furthermore, there is now a persistent drizzle that will last until March. From sherriola at earthlink.net Thu Nov 18 14:48:48 2004 From: sherriola at earthlink.net (Sherry Gomes) Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2004 07:48:48 -0700 Subject: [HPforGrownups] JKR's writing in OoP (was Re: Sirius's Future) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <002501c4cd7d$b7a2ea90$0400a8c0@pensive> No: HPFGUIDX 118135 Potioncat: I know we are not supposed to do "me too" posts, and I know JKR hasn't asked us to vote, but I really think Sirius, regretfully, is dead and he will stay dead. So I am with Pippin on this one. Sherry now: JKR has always said that dead means dead, and that is it. She's said this when people ask if James and or Lily will ever come back. As much as I want there to be some way she can pull off the return of Sirius, I keep reminding myself of her words. I heard her say them myself on the A and E biography episode. The difference between children losing fathers in war and Harry's situation is that children aren't there to witness their fathers' deaths in war and don't have to live with blaming themselves and feeling responsibility. I like the character of Sirius and want him to come back, but more than that, I wish he could return in some way that could ease Harry's guilt. He already carries a lot of guilt over Cedric, and I think his guilt over Sirius could be a terrible burden to bear. I know I'd have difficulty coping, if I thought I was responsible in that situation, and I'm a lot older than Harry with all his confused teenage hormones and emotions on top of all his other turmoil coming from being who he is. Yet I still think that JKR is going to leave Sirius dead, unfortunately, and she will use something about his death in some other plot device. Sherry G From finwitch at yahoo.com Thu Nov 18 14:56:47 2004 From: finwitch at yahoo.com (finwitch) Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2004 14:56:47 -0000 Subject: Consequences of Sirius' Death [WAS: The Second Prophecy] In-Reply-To: <200411170743762.SM01284@DEVBOX> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118136 > Vivamus: > I'm betting it has something to do with 12 Grimauld Place. With Sirius, the > last of the Blacks, now dead, ownership of the place would revert to his > nearest relative, would it not? From what I remember of the family tree, > it would be either Bellatrix or Narcissa who now owns 12GP. > > Given that house (1) has an evil house elf who knows many of the secrets of > the OOtP, (2) is FULL of dark magic artifacts, with who-knows-what > applications for weapons, etc., and (3) now belongs to the DEs, I can see > major problems coming for the OOtP out of 12GP. Finwitch: Yes, well, Andromeda and Nymphadora Tonks could *also* own it now. It's possible that Sirius left a will saying it belongs to them. Or maybe he did not. We have yet to see it. (I wonder, if Sirius left Harry a house - or a letter for the address of the house of Harry's grandparents (which is not the same as the blown-up house his parents used to live in). Vivamus: -- I was thinking, however, that > Godric's Hollow has to come into play somewhere in the series, since it was > mentioned so prominently in the first chapter of the first book, so perhaps > we will find out more about that. Harry would certainly own it, but DD > would want to keep him away from it, because (1) it actually *IS* his home, > and knowing about it might break the "home" protection he gets from thinking > of the Dursleys house as home, and (2) LV knows where it is. Finwitch: Well, if your points are correct on the nature of the 'protection', Harry's NOT protected in 4 Privet Drive since (1) is not there, for Harry has never considered his current address as a home. Hogwarts is more a home to him than the Dursleys' Place, and even before that, Harry was hoping (in vain) for some unknown relative to come and take him away. And, (2) - I think that Voldemort knows where Harry's relatives live. He did mention the name Dursley, for instance, where Peter Pettigrew could hear him. AND if he has people at the Ministry (I think)... What I think of 'shortest stay' - maybe Dursleys have a car accident and therefore Harry can't go there? Or maybe Harry believes - wrongly or correctly - that he's NOT safe at Dursleys, because he has NEVER been able to call the place his home? Finwitch From sherriola at earthlink.net Thu Nov 18 15:09:38 2004 From: sherriola at earthlink.net (Sherry Gomes) Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2004 08:09:38 -0700 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Plot in OotP In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <003101c4cd80$9fb84c60$0400a8c0@pensive> No: HPFGUIDX 118137 Just Carol wrote: SNIP It's like the carelessness regarding wands in the graveyard scene of GoF: How can Harry be holding his wand *and* the portkey in one hand and dragging Cedric's body with the other? Only in OoP, that carelessness or confusion is more extensive. In the MoM scene, for example, it's very hard to tell what's going on. Harry's confusion (not knowing which DE is which in many cases, or what spell is being cast) is reflected by the narrator and consequently becomes the reader's confusion. The cleaning scenes with the doxies were just (IMO) boring, and I can't stand Umbridge or Grawp. And yet OoP is full of treasures, glimpses into the past that we haven't seen in other books (via Occlumency), hints at the future (Mrs. Weasley's boggart). JKR's usual balance of tension and humor is there, too--Lockhart in St. Mungo's and the twins with their swamp. I loved GoF, with its realistic quarrels among the friends and real tragedy, or rather pathos, with poor Cedric, and the close-up glimpses of Voldemort as he became, if not "greater and more terrible than ever," at least more real and more threatening, if it weren't for Harry's luck in the matter of the brother wands. OoP was disappointing as a sequel. I hope that HBP is better; shorter, more tightly and carefully plotted, more action-filled, more capable of arousing the reader's sympathies. And I hope it begins to answer our questions about everyone from Snape to Grindelwald, and especially about Godric's Hollow. I wonder, though, if we'll ever find out what happened during those missing twenty-four hours, or whether JKR even knows that they're missing. Carol, hoping that other list members can tell from the writing style or the Yahoo ID which Carol is which Sherry now: Excellent post! I had many of the same reactions on my first reading of OOTP, but I wasn't on this list at the time, so I didn't have a place to vent. I had two friends over for the weekend and we all went to buy the books at midnight. I bought the audio and we proceeded to listen starting as soon as we got back to my place, till we finished, with a few sleep breaks thrown in from time to time. But I had a very difficult time getting through the book. At one point, something to do with Umbridge, I had to leave and go to bed in my own room. I couldn't take the parts with the lines and the quill cutting into Harry's skin. it bothered me so much I almost didn't finish reading the book. And Grawp was such a disappointing character. How could we be subjected to him, during the very game when Ron was being the Quidditch star? I was horrified to have missed that game all for Grawp! The battle at the ministry was difficult to follow, and I found myself just wanting to get it over instead of being on the edge of my seat with anxiety and nervousness, as I was at the end of GoF. But there were things that held me. The ways people found to defy Umbridge, especially the twins and McGonagall. The DA was terrific and it seemed to help tone down Harry's simmering anger to be doing something useful. Molly's boggart which showed how near the breaking point she is and gave her some real emotion and showed us how the war is affecting her, Arthur's attack and the aftermath with Harry's fears, Lockhart and the Longbottoms and Ginny's reminding him that she knows what it's like to be possessed. I enjoyed some of the stuff with the order, seeing moody and Lupin again and even Mrs. Black's annoying shrieking portrait. I'm hoping that HBP will bring us back to what Carol called a tightly plotted story and will begin answering some questions. I hope I will care about the characters, the action and the outcomes, because my getting wrapped up and involved in a story is something that was missing in my reactions to OOTP. Sherry G From foxmoth at qnet.com Thu Nov 18 16:06:49 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2004 16:06:49 -0000 Subject: Plot in OotP In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118138 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" wrote: It's like the carelessness regarding wands in the graveyard scene of GoF: How can Harry be holding his wand *and* the portkey in one hand and dragging Cedric's body with the other? < Pippin: Harry doesn't drag Cedric's body anywhere. --- Harry's hand closed on Cedric's wrist; one tombstone stood between him and Voldemort, but Cedric was too heavy to carry, and the Cup was out of reach-- Voldemort's red eyes flamed in the darkness. Harry saw his mouth curl into a smile, saw him raise his wand. "_Accio_!" Harry yelled, pointing his wand at the Tri-wizard Cup. It flew into the air, and soared towards him--Harry caught it by the handle-- ---- So, he's holding onto Cedric's wrist with his left hand, points his wand at the Cup with his right, the Cup soars to his right hand and Harry catches it by the handle. Not being a smoker myself, I've never tried to hold a cup of hot coffee and a burning cigarette in the same hand, but I've certainly seen it done. This sounds a lot easier. Carol: >The cleaning scenes with the doxies were just (IMO) boring, and I can't stand Umbridge or Grawp.< Pippin: But that's the point, I think. The wizarding world isn't a place where there's one exciting adventure after another and you never have to do anything painful, dull or unrewarding except as the punishment you deserve. In fact, I'd go so far as to say that people who are disappointed in OOP because it isn't much of an adventure story are right. It's a novel about politics and ideas. Pippin who thinks OOP was meant to be sipped and savored, not chugged From willsonkmom at msn.com Thu Nov 18 16:15:10 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2004 16:15:10 -0000 Subject: Plot in OotP In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118139 > Pippin: > Harry doesn't drag Cedric's body anywhere. > --- > Harry's hand closed on Cedric's wrist; one tombstone stood > between him and Voldemort, but Cedric was too heavy to carry, > and the Cup was out of reach-- > > Voldemort's red eyes flamed in the darkness. Harry saw his > mouth curl into a smile, saw him raise his wand. > > "_Accio_!" Harry yelled, pointing his wand at the Tri-wizard Cup. > > It flew into the air, and soared towards him--Harry caught it by the > handle-- > ---- > > So, he's holding onto Cedric's wrist with his left hand, points his > wand at the Cup with his right, the Cup soars to his right hand > and Harry catches it by the handle. Not being a smoker myself, > I've never tried to hold a cup of hot coffee and a burning cigarette > in the same hand, but I've certainly seen it done. This sounds a > lot easier. Potioncat: But it isn't a cigarette, it's a wand, and it isn't a coffee mug, it's a trophy. It would work if the cup sailed over and his wand went through the opening in the handle. But I'm with Carol, I don't see how he "catches" it with his hand. > > > Carol: > > >The cleaning scenes with the doxies were just (IMO) boring, > and I can't stand Umbridge or Grawp.< > > Pippin: > But that's the point, I think. The wizarding world isn't a place > where there's one exciting adventure after another and you never > have to do anything painful, dull or unrewarding except as the > punishment you deserve. > > In fact, I'd go so far as to say that people who are disappointed in > OOP because it isn't much of an adventure story are right. It's a > novel about politics and ideas. Potioncat: I think there was more to the doxies and housecleaning than meets the eyes. I think there was some DADA going on. > > Pippin > who thinks OOP was meant to be sipped and savored, not > chugged Potioncat: As one who chugged it to avoid spoilers in the RW, I agree. From theadimail at yahoo.co.in Thu Nov 18 16:36:26 2004 From: theadimail at yahoo.co.in (theadimail) Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2004 16:36:26 -0000 Subject: Plot in OotP In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118140 Hi, All this discussion on the OOTp is so welcome that I felt like adding my two bits to it. I always thought that JKR was an excellent dramatist and a bad narrator. I didn't like GOF too and I think that PoA is exactly the right length for her. OOTP was very boring until the middle when Harry sees Arthur being attacked and picks up pace from there dramtically. Reading it, one can make many excuses: we can say that OOTP has to be boring and frustrating because that's how Harry was feeling; after the intial excitement that the wizarding world had to offer him, it is palling on Harry and some of that too should rub off in the novel and many more. The fact is we can fully sympathise with these things yet demand that a good author can make the material exciting for us the readers eventhough it is going very badly for the characters in it. Yeah, there are wonderful glimpses strewn all over the novel but if JKR had just cut down the flab in the between these, OOTP would have been a great novel. About the plotlessness though. I think the structures will be more and more linear now that the series is coming to a finish. So the rest of the novels will be 'plotless' too. More of backstory and less of surprising twists and turns. Bye Adi From stonehenge.orders at verizon.net Thu Nov 18 06:14:50 2004 From: stonehenge.orders at verizon.net (kjirstem) Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2004 06:14:50 -0000 Subject: Muggleborns choosing WW In-Reply-To: <000601c4ccdb$d3ac3900$704b6d51@f3b7j4> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118141 > Pippin wrote: > > >I do wonder about the person who has the potential to be a > >skillful surgeon or a brilliant software engineer, but has only a > >mediocre magical talent. Are they really better off in the WW? It's > >fun to wish we were witches and wizards, but the law of > >averages predicts that half of us will be less talented than the > >other half. > > Ffred: > If someone has the potential but it's unrealised, then it may well > be that > they know no better. If they _already_ have begun to develop their > potential, then I suspect that they would be able to contribute to >WW society just as to Muggle society: a potential computer whiz would > have the kind of mindset that could take research into spell >development in directions which would seem obvious to our eyes but >would be inconceivable to the notorious illogic of the WW kjirstem: I think there are other things to consider about an individual's contribution to society in the WW or the Muggle world. Because of the International Statute of Wizarding Secrecy, magic cannot be used to solve problems in the Muggle world. Since magic is what wizards are trained in, and since more mundane knowledge is not cultivated after age 11, their skills are not of use to the rest of the world. To me, this seems to limit the scope of what a wizard or witch can accomplish. There are a lot more Muggles than people in the WW, regardless of the calculation method used for the WW population. So, a person with talents that are fundamentally non-magical might be able to do a lot more good in the Muggle world. The interesting thing, I think, is that the breach between the Muggle and magic worlds doesn't seem to be in the WW's best interests. (At least now, maybe it was in 1692.) The WW is probably somewhat dependent on the Muggle world for food, and manfactured goods. I suspect the WW would be affected by dramatic changes in the Muggle world, such as war or widespread disease. Yet, the WW has little effect on the Muggle world due to the Statute of Secrecy. The WW comes across as conservative and changing very little over time (e.g. robes, forms of address at school, ghost Binns teaching history). I doubt there is much innovation in the use of magic; the teaching methods appear to emphasize rote memorization. Fred and George are a break from this, they actually invent things. But generally, there is a recipe presented to the students and they learn the recipe rather than the reasons. In addition, with fewer people there are fewer ideas to try, therefore change occurs at a slower pace. On the other hand, since the break between the worlds there have been substantial changes in what the Muggle world can accomplish. Eventually the Muggle world will catch up to or surpass the WW in many ways; communication is already better in the Muggle world than in the WW. The WW seems to exist to keep dangerous magical creatures and people away from Muggles. Sure, one result is that Muggles aren't harrassing witches and wizards. But, as Muggle technology advances, the balance of power between the WW and the Muggle world gradually changes. At some point it may become impossible to keep the WW secret, and by then the advantages that the WW could offer Muggles may be too small to be an effective bargaining tool. Re-integration at an earlier date, when magic hasn't yet been outstripped by technology, could result in a higher status for the WW. kjirstem - who should really be doing something more constructive and beneficial for society...arrgh. From annemehr at yahoo.com Thu Nov 18 18:04:07 2004 From: annemehr at yahoo.com (annemehr) Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2004 18:04:07 -0000 Subject: Plot in OotP In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118142 > > Pippin: > > Harry doesn't drag Cedric's body anywhere. > > So, he's holding onto Cedric's wrist with his left hand, points > his > > wand at the Cup with his right, the Cup soars to his right hand > > and Harry catches it by the handle. Not being a smoker myself, > > I've never tried to hold a cup of hot coffee and a burning > cigarette > > in the same hand, but I've certainly seen it done. This sounds a > > lot easier. > > Potioncat: > But it isn't a cigarette, it's a wand, and it isn't a coffee mug, > it's a trophy. It would work if the cup sailed over and his wand > went through the opening in the handle. But I'm with Carol, I don't > see how he "catches" it with his hand. Annemehr: Actually, I've caught things tossed at my by my kids while my hands were full. I picture Harry saying "Accio," then as the cup flies toward him, he keeps his wand pinched in the crook between his thumb and his hand so as to catch the cup with his fingers against his palm. Remember, this is a kid with lightning reflexes and exquisite eye-hand coordination who catches snitches all the time. Plenty of RL teenaged athletes do more difficult things. Some more general responses to the whole thread: The MoM scene is indeed well plotted and believable. Well, *of course* the DEs cleared Harry's way into the DoM for him, and don't forget there were at least three of them there who were well familiar with the Ministry -- Malfoy, Rookwood and McNair. The real mystery, though, is why Hermione didn't object to it being *too* easy (though by then she may just have had her mouth shut and her eyes open). Also, if you read the narrative carefully, it is possible to identify the DEs that Harry fought with, partly because JKR carefully named them all as Lucius paired them off to hunt Harry. It took me pages of notes, but I did it. Jo was definitely working from a chart in those scenes. As for "connecting the dots," I believe JKR intends that we do a lot of that ourselves. All she has to do is lay all the dots out in some logical pattern. She is not going to spell everything out, such as why the kids ran into no MoM guards. This isn't "Nancy Drew," after all. Besides, we are only 5/7 of the way through. I even think I know why (for example) Crouch Jr. had to use the Triwizard Cup as a portkey, and also why Jo hasn't explained it yet; I expect it has to do with Hogwarts' defenses and things that would come up in the event of an attack on Hogwarts. The "no apparition" defense is meant to be a hint, IMO. Harry's "mood" is another issue. Judging by traumatising events in my own life, and keeping in mind that Harry had just been kidnapped, witness to a murder, tortured, violated and nearly killed, I find his behaviour in OoP not only understandable, but quite good under the worsening circumstances -- circumstances which, far from being arbitrarily contrived, follow well from the foregoing plot. Events are closing in on him, and in his stubborn struggle to live his life, he will become the person who is capable of defeating Voldemort -- believably. Jo warned us this story would get very dark, and OoP is probably Harry's darkest hour. That said, I do agree that some of the prose could have been tightened up in certain chapters, and in certain short passages. I also wonder why we had to miss Ron's Quidditch triumph. These are fairly minor points to me, compared to the overall genius of the book. I realise other people will have different tastes, but I also think that OoP is not a bad book, nor is it a pefect book, but it is a very good book that a fair few people dislike. Oh, and adverbs? Equal rights for adverbs, I say! It's time for them to leave their second-class position and take their place amongst the elite with the verbs, nouns, and prepositions! We must learn to no longer devalue the information they impart! Besides, someone once rewrote a phrase to convey the same information without one, and it turned out to be a small paragraph; imagine the size of OoP if Jo'd done that? > Pippin > > who thinks OOP was meant to be sipped and savored, not > > chugged Oh, absolutely. The complex flavors and aromas are amazing when you do. Annemehr who loved OoP very much, once the initial shock was over... From Vivamus at TaprootTech.com Thu Nov 18 10:28:57 2004 From: Vivamus at TaprootTech.com (Vivamus) Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2004 05:28:57 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] "Conjured" food (was Re: The Nature of Galleons) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200411180529949.SM01284@DEVBOX> No: HPFGUIDX 118143 > > Vivamus: > >snip > > So kids from wizarding families would be using magic from the time > they were > > small in their own homes and families. Wizard kids in muggle > families, of > > course, would have different rules. > > > Potioncat: > But in OoP, at the Weasley household, it is stated that the trio > have to hand carry dishes to the tables, but that the older members > of the family (Bill and Charlie) can use magic. Then at some point, > the twins use magic at every opportunity, even when Molly would > prefer they didn't. Vivamus: Wasn't that at 12GP, rather than in their own homes? Also, given the paranoia about Harry at the MoM, I suspect the rules were held EXTRA tight with regards to the trio, to help them stay out of trouble with the Ministry. What about all the kids who know lots of magic (e.g., Snape and hexes) before they even come to Hogwarts? What about all the stories about kids hexing each other, charming objects (Ron's pillow/spider), etc., while growing up? If none of them could use any magic at all before coming to Hogwarts, and it was monitored by the Ministry, it would strain credibility. Can you imagine growing up in a wizard family, knowing you were magical, and never being able to DO any of it? Would you be able to resist? I know I wouldn't. I think the answer to this is probably simple, in that the ministry only monitors magic in the presence of muggles, and underage magic outside the allowed areas of Hogwarts and the children's homes. The monitoring spells could be made to do it in just that way; otherwise, they would drown in information from all the spells cast everywhere. (Also, it's clear that dark magic done in secret IS in secret, so magic in general must not be monitored.) (Actually, I'm not sure about magic in muggle areas being generally monitored from canon. Perhaps I extrapolated that from the notes Harry received about the hover charm and the patronus. Both mentioned that the magic was performed in muggle areas and in the presence of muggles, which suggested to me that the Ministry ALSO watches magic in muggle areas in general, but that's probably a stretch.) If that's the case, then the spells would only have to watch magic by underage wizards outside approved areas (Hogwarts and WW homes). Much simpler. Parents probably still give kids the line, "don't you dare even TRY to do magic, you'll be brought before the Ministry, think of your family, etc., etc.," and it probably is technically illegal, but for practical purposes, no one pays attention to it in the home except the parents. Vivamus, whose cat Snickersqueak wants to know if catnip can be made more potent by magic From bob.oliver at cox.net Thu Nov 18 11:33:13 2004 From: bob.oliver at cox.net (lupinlore) Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2004 11:33:13 -0000 Subject: Harry left at the Dursleys (Was Re: Plot in OotP) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118144 Alla wrote: > > > > Alla: > As I said , if this is the reason, which I am inclined to agree > with, I will buy it. > > I will buy Dumbledore's sufferings because he sees Harry abused and > cannot interfere in fear for his life. > > What I don't buy is that Dumbledore who left Harry with Dursleys > for the purpose of teaching him a lesson that life is hard and > children are abused in such life all the time, can be called a > wise man and "epithome of goodness". Oh, certainly I agree with you Alla. I think that the whole moral question about Harry and the Dursleys doesn't turn on the issue of leaving Harry there in the first place. After all, if he had been placed in the wizarding world how would he have survived? Hogwarts is supposedly the safest place in wizarding Britain and yet Harry has faced Deatheaters (twice), a psychopathic bureaucrat, a basilisk, dementors, and Voldemort himself in three different incarnations. The question is about why didn't interfere with the Dursleys' abuse. I, like you, can't buy the whole "life's lessons" argument. Nor can I believe that Dumbledore is restrained by his "goodness." It's hard to argue under any reasonable definition of goodness that Dumbledore would somehow be less noble for restraining the Dursleys than for letting them "make their own choices." The only definitions of goodness that could apply here are 1)he genuinely fears that if he intervenes it would lead to Harry's death, or 2) he feels if he intervenes it would be bad for the wizarding world. Well, if we look at 2) it could be bad for the wizarding world if a) interfering would lead to Harry being spoiled and susceptible to evil, or b) it would lead to Harry not being able to fulfill his destiny because he's dead. Well, 2b) is the same as 1)in terms of goal, except that the ultimate motivation is different. 2a) is the same one that both Alla and I vehemently reject. What it all comes down to is that this whole issue needs further clarification. If it is indeed revealed that Ddore was somehow restrained and was anguishing over the letters from Mrs. Figg but felt he could do nothing because it would lead to Harry's death, then all is well and good. I have a feeling that JKR thinks she makes something like that clear when in fact she has not done so. We will see. Lupinlore From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Thu Nov 18 18:22:04 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2004 18:22:04 -0000 Subject: Plot in OotP In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118145 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "annemehr" wrote: > Harry's "mood" is another issue. Judging by traumatising events in my > own life, and keeping in mind that Harry had just been kidnapped, > witness to a murder, tortured, violated and nearly killed, I find his > behaviour in OoP not only understandable, but quite good under the > worsening circumstances -- circumstances which, far from being > arbitrarily contrived, follow well from the foregoing plot. Events are > closing in on him, and in his stubborn struggle to live his life, he > will become the person who is capable of defeating Voldemort -- > believably. Jo warned us this story would get very dark, and OoP is > probably Harry's darkest hour. Alla: Oh, definitely, no question about it - Harry's mood I found to be incredibly believable and I agree that under circumstances Harry was holding up amazingly well. I confess though as much as I loved OOP, Jo comments about Harry "mastering his emotions" in HBP bothered me very very much. So, my question is - do you think that she will do believable transition in his emotions again? You know, not glossing over his grief and pain, following up on what Dursleys did to him. etc.? If OOP is indeed Harry's darkest hour, HBP just cannot become his "shiny hour" right away, it has to be dark at least for a while, IMO. From Vivamus at TaprootTech.com Thu Nov 18 11:47:35 2004 From: Vivamus at TaprootTech.com (Vivamus) Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2004 06:47:35 -0500 Subject: Harry left at the Dursleys (Was Re: Plot in OotP) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200411180648171.SM01284@DEVBOX> No: HPFGUIDX 118146 > Snow: > It is never the easy road that makes you strong but the hard one. > Where is the protection...it is their life...their choice...such > maybe the Dumbledore theory! Grow up hard. Everything didn't come > to Harry on a silver spoon with the Dursleys...in fact far from > it. Was Harry protected...No...But if Harry would have been allowed > the privileges of growing up in the world he was born to...what > might he have been...another Tom Riddle or a Malfoy? Vivamus: While I agree with you in general, one note on Tom Riddle: He grew up dirt-poor in a muggle orphanage, amidst considerable abuse, judging from Tom's comments in the diary scene. In some ways, a very similar childhood to Harry's. A relevant question might be, why did the two turn out so different? > Alla: > Sorry, but big NO again. The only thing I was arguing is the > necessity for Dumbledore to choose lesser evil from two - for > Harry to be dead or alive but abused. > > If you are arguing that Dumbledore put Harry with Dursleys for the > reason of "not spoiling him" and teaching him some life lesson, > such Dumbledore gets ZERO sympathy from me. Abuse is NOT a life > lesson, which needs to be given to a child and I would argue that > child SHOULD be protected from such lessons if it is possible at all. > > The only justification for Dumbledore in mind would be that he did > not want to see Harry dead. Vivamus: As terrible as child abuse is, kids are a lot more resilient than most people give them credit for being. Taking a child away from its natural parents nearly always makes things worse for the child instead of better (with the single exception being situations in which the child's life is in danger from the abuse.) Loss of a stable home environment, however bad that environment is, is one of the very worst things a child can experience. (I know, it's not politically correct, but it is what recent studies on interventions [situations in which children are taken out of their homes and put in foster care] have been showing.) That's not in any way the slightest justification of abuse, btw. It is the observation that well-meaning "help" often causes more harm than even the worst imaginable abuse. Let's assume DD knows this. Let's further assume the first Trelawney prophecy is not a red herring, but meant exactly what DD said it meant. Let's look at baby Harry's situation from his point of view. Harry has been put in the home of the only family on the planet who can protect him. His aunt agreed, and sealed the protection by doing so. He has suffered the trauma of seeing his parents murdered, but probably didn't understand what that meant at all. Petunia is FAMILY. By all DD can tell, the Dursleys, while particularly unpleasant muggles, would be the best equipped to provide him with the loving environment he needs. DD knows TRs background. He knows how important a stable home is for Harry, if Harry is ever to be able to fight LV and win. He knows the Dursleys will probably be unpleasant to Harry, but he has no reason to think they would be as nasty as they end up being. It's probably a year or three down the road before it becomes clear the Dursleys are never going to be won over by this little boy who has been thrust upon him, that they are going to continue to hate him and treat him with contempt, and that he is likely to suffer considerably at the hands of his cousin as they grow. What can DD do? If he comes in and threatens the Dursleys, they are likely to just toss Harry out; even if they don't, the interaction would have huge consequences in their relationship with Harry, and DD probably can't know what those are. Unlike the first time, when Harry was too small to remember, if his home is broken now, he will suffer the pain of it his entire life. Could that pain be the difference between a Harry Potter and a Tom Riddle? DD isn't omniscient; all he knows is that Harry is doing okay where he is. It's much worse for Harry than DD had hoped, but the Dursleys, as awful as they are, are at least feeding him, sheltering him, and providing some sense of values. I imagine it must have been quite frightening for DD to watch, realizing that he had put Harry into such an awful situation, but by the time it became awful, there was nothing he could do that wouldn't make it worse. Leaving Harry there (and probably doing a whole lot of worrying) was probably the ONLY thing DD could do. Vivamus From mgrantwich at yahoo.com Thu Nov 18 16:21:41 2004 From: mgrantwich at yahoo.com (Magda Grantwich) Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2004 08:21:41 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] JKR's writing in OoP (was Re: Sirius's Future) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041118162142.45429.qmail@web53104.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 118147 --- justcarol67 wrote: > I've been taken to task for thinking that the living Sirius really > had nothing more to contribute as a character, trapped as he was in > his own depression and unable to offer much beyond bad advice to > Harry and his home as headquarters for the Order. His miserable > adult life was the tragic result of his own bad choices (the Secret > Keeper switch and confronting Peter after Godric's Hollow chief > among them), and his death was also the consequence of his own > choices (going to the MoM rather than waiting for Dumbledore, > taunting Bellatrix instead of viewing her as a serious threat). > Please note that I'm not blaming him > for trying to save Harry any more than I blame Harry for trying to > save him, but both of them suffered for these seemingly right > choices, > and Sirius would be alive if either he or Harry had stayed away. > Choices have consequences, and sometimes those consequences are > painful. > > Carol, back from California and trying to respond only to recent > posts Risking the wrath of the List ELves to say "I totally agree" and it's worth re-reading because it's so true. Magda __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? The all-new My Yahoo! - Get yours free! http://my.yahoo.com From willsonkmom at msn.com Thu Nov 18 18:51:23 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2004 18:51:23 -0000 Subject: "Conjured" food (was Re: The Nature of Galleons) In-Reply-To: <200411180529949.SM01284@DEVBOX> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118148 > > Potioncat: > > But in OoP, at the Weasley household, it is stated that the trio > > have to hand carry dishes to the tables, but that the older members > > of the family (Bill and Charlie) can use magic. Then at some point, > > the twins use magic at every opportunity, even when Molly would > > prefer they didn't. > > Vivamus: > Wasn't that at 12GP, rather than in their own homes? Also, given the > paranoia about Harry at the MoM, I suspect the rules were held EXTRA tight > with regards to the trio, to help them stay out of trouble with the > Ministry. Potioncat: No, I'm talking about in GoF, when Harry and Hermione were staying at the Weasleys around the time of the World Cup. (It happens again in OoP at 12GP when the twins use every possible opportunity to use magic now that they can.) I remember thinking it was strange that they couldn't do magic in their own homes for household purposes. >>Vivamus > What about all the kids who know lots of magic (e.g., Snape and hexes) > before they even come to Hogwarts? What about all the stories about kids > hexing each other, charming objects (Ron's pillow/spider), etc., while > growing up? If none of them could use any magic at all before coming to > Hogwarts, and it was monitored by the Ministry, it would strain credibility. snip Potioncat: Well, when you get down to it, the whole thing is very inconsistent in the books. I was mainly interested in the rule itself rather than the monitoring of it. Of course in the RW kids are not supposed to drink alcohol, smoke, drive cars...but some do. Some of those get caught and some don't. From ginnysthe1 at yahoo.com Thu Nov 18 19:15:34 2004 From: ginnysthe1 at yahoo.com (ginnysthe1) Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2004 19:15:34 -0000 Subject: Plot in OotP In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118149 Adi wrote: >All this discussion on the OOTp is so welcome that I felt like adding my two bits to it. I always thought that JKR was an excellent dramatist and a bad narrator. I didn't like GOF too and I think that PoA is exactly the right length for her. OOTP was very boring until the middle when Harry sees Arthur being attacked and picks up pace from there dramatically. Reading it, one can make many excuses: we can say that OOTP has to be boring and frustrating because that's how Harry was feeling; after the initial excitement that the wizarding world had to offer him, it is palling on Harry and some of that too should rub off in the novel and many more. The fact is we can fully sympathise with these things yet demand that a good author can make the material exciting for us the readers even though it is going very badly for the characters in it.< >Yeah, there are wonderful glimpses strewn all over the novel but if JKR had just cut down the flab in the between these, OOTP would have been a great novel.< >About the plotlessness though. I think the structures will be more and more linear now that the series is coming to a finish. So the rest of the novels will be 'plotless' too. More of backstory and less of surprising twists and turns.< Kim adding a few more bits to the thread: I think it's possible that more backstory in the last novels might furnish the surprising twists and turns you're looking for, don't you? OotP was my favorite of the series so far, and one reason I'm biased in its favor is that it *was* so long! Definitely something to be savored (as Pippin suggests) if you have the time. But then I'd read nearly the complete works of Dickens by the time I was 19, so the "flabbiness" of OotP didn't bother me a bit. IIRC, JKR was interviewed somewhere and she said that the last two books may be even longer than Phoenix. That a girl! ;-) In any event, not having read OotP for the second time yet, I'll keep an eye out next time for any parts that bore, bewilder, annoy, etc. Can't think of any right now... Oh, and one last comment. Maybe we're forgetting the schedule JKR is on. She's really cranking them out, isn't she, considering how long it takes other writers to produce their own "masterpieces." She's writing a serial in a sense, and some of her readers are walking the floors waiting for the next "baby" to be born. And then there's the demand made by the HP movies: trying to get books out in time to finish *that* series before the actors get too old to play teenagers, or die of old age, as the case may be. So, flaws and all, I think she's doing an admirable job. After all, it could even be that some of the flaws can be traced to the hurry she's in. Maybe over the coming years, after she finishes the series, she'll go back to the books, do some editing, and publish "new and improved" versions, and then we'll all be happy... Kim From annemehr at yahoo.com Thu Nov 18 19:25:50 2004 From: annemehr at yahoo.com (annemehr) Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2004 19:25:50 -0000 Subject: Plot in OotP In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118150 > Alla: > I confess though as much as I loved OOP, Jo comments about > Harry "mastering his emotions" in HBP bothered me very very much. > > So, my question is - do you think that she will do believable > transition in his emotions again? You know, not glossing over his > grief and pain, following up on what Dursleys did to him. etc.? > > If OOP is indeed Harry's darkest hour, HBP just cannot become > his "shiny hour" right away, it has to be dark at least for a while, > IMO. Annemehr: Well, I'm not worried. After GoF, I worried that Harry would not be affected enough in the next book; that he would continue too much the same as he always had. When OoP came out I saw that I was worried for nothing. It's almost the same situation now. Harry knows now that he has to get control of himself, and why. He knows that just relying on doing whatever you can think of, and on luck, and on help coming just in time, in a crisis is not enough. He also knows that letting his emotions rule him had terrible consequences. I have confidence that Jo will show enough of him working through his guilt feelings and beginning to pull himself together. Of course, in real life such a thing might take many years, and Jo can't afford to write that way, but I think she'll make it believable. Of course, Harry is also highly motivated -- he knows he'll have to face Voldemort, he knew that even before he knew the prophecy. Besides, Jo has already begun the process. She had Harry sit by the lake for hours, so things could sink in for him. She gave him a little comfort and hope from Luna, and the knowledge that his friends would be looking out for him -- powerful, adult friends, even -- at the King's Cross sendoff. If Harry gets explicit support and some real information from people who are in a postition to give it (Lupin, Arabella, Dumbledore, Arthur and Molly), it would be something good that he had never quite had before, and would go a long way towards getting him back on his feet. I also think Jo will take the next book and a half at least to mature him completely. I'll be quite happy, though, if she manages to ease some of his pains within the first couple of chapters! Gee, and I was worried this was going to turn out to be a one-liner... Annemehr From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Thu Nov 18 19:40:49 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2004 19:40:49 -0000 Subject: Plot in OotP In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118151 > Annemehr: > Well, I'm not worried. After GoF, I worried that Harry would not be > affected enough in the next book; that he would continue too much the > same as he always had. When OoP came out I saw that I was worried for > nothing. > > It's almost the same situation now. Harry knows now that he has to > get control of himself, and why. He knows that just relying on doing > whatever you can think of, and on luck, and on help coming just in > time, in a crisis is not enough. He also knows that letting his > emotions rule him had terrible consequences. huge snip > I also think Jo will take the next book and a half at least to mature > him completely. I'll be quite happy, though, if she manages to ease > some of his pains within the first couple of chapters! > > Gee, and I was worried this was going to turn out to be a one- liner... > Alla: Oh, when you put it this way I am feeling more optimistic too. Yes, going back to hwen I first read GoF, I was worried that we won't hear about Harry being traumatised from witnessing the death of the clasmate and being violated by violent psychopath. You are right indeed, we worried for nothing. It is true, normally the process of recovery would take years, but no matter how much I want to see Harry happy at the end, I do not want his pain to dissappear within first two chapters. If it gets easier for him at the end of HBP, I can live with that, but not in the beginning. I also agree that keeping Harry informed will work wonders in healing his wounds. We will definitely see then whether Dumbledore indeed learned as much as he claimed from his mistakes. If he won't keep Harry in the dark about major happenings of the war, Dumbledore will be forgiven in my book :o) From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Thu Nov 18 19:52:59 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2004 19:52:59 -0000 Subject: SNAPE the coward? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118152 "chrusotoxos" wrote: > > > But what if Voldemort sees SNAPE as the coward, > > > and Karkaroff as the traitor? Valky: > > I had a similar thought, but not as good, that DD trusts Snape > > because Snape is in his protection, simple as that. Basically > > Snape needs a way out of Voldies gang but with out DD he's mince. Potioncat: > It works very well either way and strong arguments have been made > for both views. JKR tells us that many have figured it out, but of > course she doesn't tell us who has the right answer. I think it's > safe to say the 3 individuals are Crouch JR, Snape and Karkaroff. > (Although someone will disagree.) > > Is Snape set up for punishment or death?" And how will he survive? SSSusan: Yes, the arguments *have* been made for Crouch, Jr., Snape & Karkaroff to be in these three slots, both with Snape as "gone forever" and Karkaroff as "coward" *and* with Snape as "coward" and Karkaroff as "gone forever". There have also been those who've postulated that Snape actually managed to GET to the graveyard, though Harry didn't know it, and that the three Voldy referred to were Crouch, Jr., Karkaroff and someone else -- Bagman, perhaps? I rather like this possibility, though of course logistically it would've been difficult for Snape to have pulled it off. Siriusly Snapey Susan From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Thu Nov 18 20:23:10 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2004 20:23:10 -0000 Subject: Harry mastering his emotions in HPB (was: Plot in OotP) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118153 Alla: > > I confess though as much as I loved OOP, Jo comments about > > Harry "mastering his emotions" in HBP bothered me very very much. > > > > So, my question is - do you think that she will do believable > > transition in his emotions again? You know, not glossing over his > > grief and pain, following up on what Dursleys did to him. etc.? > > > > If OOP is indeed Harry's darkest hour, HBP just cannot become > > his "shiny hour" right away, it has to be dark at least for a > > while, IMO. Annemehr: > Well, I'm not worried. After GoF, I worried that Harry would not be > affected enough in the next book; that he would continue too much > the same as he always had. When OoP came out I saw that I was > worried for nothing. > > It's almost the same situation now. Harry knows now that he has to > get control of himself, and why. He knows that just relying on > doing whatever you can think of, and on luck, and on help coming > just in time, in a crisis is not enough. He also knows that > letting his emotions rule him had terrible consequences. > > I have confidence that Jo will show enough of him working through > his guilt feelings and beginning to pull himself together. Of > course, in real life such a thing might take many years, and Jo > can't afford to write that way, but I think she'll make it > believable. Of course, Harry is also highly motivated -- he knows > he'll have to face Voldemort, he knew that even before he knew the > prophecy. SSSusan: I agree with this, Annemehr. I envision rejoining Harry in HBP and finding him, by turns, grieving, pissed, guilt-ridden and even emotionally "dead"--that vacant, dazed, empty kind of demeanor one puts on when attempting to just shut it all down. I was one who found Harry's surliness and CAPSLOCKness quite believable in OoP. In fact, I've found JKR's ability to paint teenage emotions to be incredibly "accurate" or believable throughout the series so far. Maybe it's my experience as a high school teacher and as a junior high school Sunday school leader, but I think she has been able to capture both emotional reactions & states and even the things which *matter* to kids these ages pretty darn well. So I do have faith in her ability to bring Harry 'round from the CAPSLOCK!Harry of OoP to a realistic mastering his emotions (most of the time) at some point in HBP. No, I don't expect it right away, but I can see it happening as the reality of the seriousness of what faces them all really, really sinks in...and as the anger over Sirius' death solidifies into resolve to get rid of Voldy. This is one of the reasons I've proposed before [and taken some grief for doing so, I might add :-)] that Harry will manage to find a way to work w/ Snape, even if Snape keeps on being a prick. I think JKR will show us a Harry who comes to be ready to really focus on ending VoldyWarII. He may resist for awhile, he may be too upset for awhile, but I think he'll come 'round, and I think a part of that will mean his KNOWING he'll have to work w/ everyone in the Order, no matter his personal feelings and his belief that he's despised by at least one of them. Siriusly Snapey Susan From Vivamus at TaprootTech.com Thu Nov 18 20:36:46 2004 From: Vivamus at TaprootTech.com (Vivamus) Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2004 15:36:46 -0500 Subject: Magic before Hogwarts / in wizard homes (was RE: "Conjured" food) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200411181538285.SM01320@DEVBOX> No: HPFGUIDX 118154 > Potioncat: > No, I'm talking about in GoF, when Harry and Hermione were staying > at the Weasleys around the time of the World Cup. (It happens again > in OoP at 12GP when the twins use every possible opportunity to use > magic now that they can.) I remember thinking it was strange that > they couldn't do magic in their own homes for household purposes. Vivamus: Okay, Potioncat, I surrender to the canon. Point made. > >>Vivamus > > What about all the kids who know lots of magic before > > they even come to Hogwarts? If none of them could > > use any magic at all before coming to Hogwarts, and it was > > monitored by the Ministry, it would strain credibility. > snip > > Potioncat: > Well, when you get down to it, the whole thing is very inconsistent > in the books. I was mainly interested in the rule itself rather > than the monitoring of it. > > Of course in the RW kids are not supposed to drink alcohol, smoke, > drive cars...but some do. Some of those get caught and some don't. I expect that's exactly what it is. It still begs the question of why most of them don't get caught, which hearkens back to the MoM only watching outside WW homes. Vivamus From R.Vink2 at chello.nl Thu Nov 18 21:04:55 2004 From: R.Vink2 at chello.nl (Renee) Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2004 21:04:55 -0000 Subject: Plot in OotP In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118155 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "lupinlore" wrote: > > sophierom wrote: > >.... Dumbledore makes the most callous choices because he wants to > > put wizardingkind above the happiness of one child. But, as the > > relationship deepens, Dumbledore begins to love Harry so much that > his > > emotions interfere with good decision making. We're seeing the > > decline of Dumbledore as we we see the rise of Harry and Voldemort. > > It's kind of sad, really! Lupinlore: > Well, I could see this, except for JKR's comment about Dumbledore > being "very wise" and "the epitome of goodness." This type of > callous behavior doesn't strike me as very consistent with either. > And if she has Harry simply forgiving him and saying "It's all right > that you left me to be abused, I understand," I'm not so sure I won't > throw the book against the wall. > Renee: But this is just another example of JKR interpreting her own books for us, of telling us about Dumbledore's wisdom and goodness instead of letting the text show it. The kind of comment I wish she would refrain from, especially as it overrules a perfectly plausible interpretation like the one Sophierom gave above. I'm sure JKR intends Dumbledore to be very wise and the epitome of goodness, but his actions or inactions ought to speak for themselves instead of needing the author's comments to be viewed in the proper light. As for Dumbledore himself, as I see it he's set up as the archetypical old mage found in traditional fairy stories and folktales, knowledgeable but detached and not unlike the proverbial puppetmaster. But then, as the series moves further away from the fairytale, he slowly turns into a fallible and emotionally vulnerable human being. Or rather, it's Harry's perception of him that changes, evolving from childish concepts about omnipotent parental figures or even deities to more realistic and mature views. Not quite incidentally, this fits in very well with (just)Carol's remark in message #118116 about Harry Potter as a novel about growing up. Renee From heos at virgilio.it Thu Nov 18 20:49:37 2004 From: heos at virgilio.it (chrusotoxos) Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2004 20:49:37 -0000 Subject: SNAPE the coward? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118156 > > Valky: > > Hello Chrusotoxos welcome to the group! > > WOW what an awesome insightful post!!! > > I am impressed, you are the first person I have seen with this > > theory, you original, you. > > I completely see your sense, utterly. > > Carolyn: > The idea was first mentioned back in July 2000, see this old Yahoo > Club message: > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups-Archives/message/3797 > > It has been discussed very extensively at regular intervals since > then, see: > > 15274, 15775 > 17331, 17575 > 18236 > 19935 > 22922, 22959 > > just for starters. Much of the early debate about Snape's status/DE > or not was pulled together in this FP: > > http://www.hpfgu.org.uk/faq/snape.html > > Not that the subject is not worth discussing again, and endlessly, > but worth looking up past arguments first. So, hi everybody! Thank you a lot for being so nice, m.clifford - you weren't so wrong, since I did think about it all by myself, and I only discovered recently (seems incredible, but I've been raving about having nobody to talk to about HP, since my friends either don't know English either think that they're children books) that millions of people were just there on my screen talking all day about it... :)) And thank you carolynwhite2 for letting me know about the posts, I'll go and check them out. I am so dying about this issue (well, about the whole question of Snape's fidelity, really), I wish jkr would hurry up...but then again, when we'll know everything about Snape he won't be so fascinating as a character. I've heard that some guys are sure that Snape was in the circle that night, and at one moment I was almost convinced...but there's still the fact, that, back in the hospital wing, Snape flinched when he heard that Malfoy was there...why would he? I mean, if he was there too, he must have known that Malfoy was there, because Voldemort called him by name. So my reasoning is that he could not have been there - that he didn't go because he sort of thought that only very mad people, like the Lestranges, or the very weak ones, like Crabbe, would go, whereas the powerful ones, like himself and Malfoy, had had enough with this rubbish the first time. I think he was really a friend to Malfoy for these 13 years, and that they had decided not to help Voldemort back because life was easier without him. I mean, they could always kidnap muggles and do stuff, and they don't risk to be murdered any second. But Malfoy answered the call, and Snape is compelled to follow... Also, I can't think that Voldemort wouldn't have talked to him if he was there. A guy spying at Hogwarts, how cool is that? And to show Harry that even his teachers wanted him dead... Well. Oh, and m.clifford, I'm really concerned with this subject, and an idea for a short story popped in my mind last month. I posted it on ff.net, they told me it was interesting, so if you want...let me know if you like it. It's called obliviate!, posted under my pen name chrusotoxos, and is set in the summer of the fifth year...Harry has to decide whether Snape is trustworthy or not, and he'd better get it right... chrusotoxos From heos at virgilio.it Thu Nov 18 21:24:17 2004 From: heos at virgilio.it (chrusotoxos) Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2004 21:24:17 -0000 Subject: The Second Prophecy plus a correction In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118157 Ok, ok, no need to get nasty...I mean, we're adults discussing a children book, aren't we pathetic enough without biting our heads off? ;)) Sorry if I seemed so, anyway. So, back to Sirius. I ready your posts, Kneasy, and I'm not convinced. But let me clarify something first: I don't like him all that lot! Snape is defintely my favourite character, as it's yours, I guess. You wrote: "What does 'sexy beast' imply? Byronic good looks, unreliable as hell and invariably trouble. That sort always let you down; come on, admit it, they're bastards. But you keep making excuses for them." And you're totally right. We've seen it in the pensieve: Sirius was arrogant, and handsome, and self-inflated - at 15. Life could have changed him, made him more mature - but he didn't have any life, Sirius at 33 is Sirius at 17 plus 12 years of hard prison. And you wrote: "But there are those that think that Sirius would be a most suitable guardian for Harry, even though: He's spent 12 years in Azkaban and is on the run He has no experience with children He has no idea of Harry's emotional or physical needs He is rash, disruptive, argumentative, a potential murderer (twice plus the 'Prank'), compulsive, naive, and has totally unrealistic expectations of Harry. Would you hand a child over to such a person? No - and neither will DD. He's not to be trusted with the care of someone as critical to DD's plan as Harry is." Totally right again, even if I hate taking sides with a mother hen such as Molly Weasley...:) But all this doesn't mean that he's a DE or worse! I mean, very often handsome bastards are mean to women they want to sleep with, not with the whole world! I imagine you have yourself some marvellous friends/brothers/cousins/ex-guys who are very nice persons...except to women! So if Sirius did trick some flies into his web, that doesn't mean that he can not be trustworthy on giving his life for the order. I mean, Snape is the perfect exemple of this: he really is a horrible person, but I'm with Dumbledore: I trust him. Maybe he's not nice to the kids, but he's working to protect them. As for your other objections, here is my answer: About Sirius' flight from Azkaban, yeah, that's strange. But there could be something JKR is not telling us. I mean, maybe normally they had protection against animagi, but that day something went wrong without Sirius knowing. There is no prison from which you can't escape. About the trial, well, we were told that Crouch had stopped doing trials. That's a very horrible thing, but it's very common, especially in war time, look at real history...no need to imagine a conspiracy behind it. About the dementors: they were not going for Harry in PoA! They need to feed, they were going for a large crowd of students (and Harry fell down because of his personal weakness to them - totally justified) and then for Sirius. They ignored Snape and Hermione and went to Harry because he was trying to protect Sirius. Fudge was trying to save him, not to kill him! I mean, same thing: Fudge is playing his own political game, doesn't mean he wants Harry dead! He could support Lucius because he doesn't realize how dangerous he is. Sometimes you and a horrible guy think alike about a subject (ie, Dumdledore is too old and arrogant), and Fudge didn't realize how dangerous it was to make an alliance on this base. About the dragons: Sirius thought about the conjunctivitis curse, one of the most effective on a dragon. Moody came up with the broom theory, but he has been working months on it! About the end of GoF: would you trust such an important message to floo or owls, when both of them can be intercepted? and it was also a good occasion to give something useful to do to Sirius, and to force him to live in a house for a change, to have some friends again. About OotP: Come on! Voldie doesn't care about Harry living or dying, and he doesn't now that he has to kill him himself. If Sirius was working for him, how come he didn't put Harry in danger? Yes, he has some teenager reactions, and I find this very sad and very believable. But I don't think Dumbledore can afford to have a good fighter killed. Maybe Sirius had to die so that Harry wouldn't fear death anymore (how worse it is to outlive a loved one? And Voldie can't know this, since he doesn't love anyone), as someone said, but I also think that Sirius couldn't survive. He's one of these characters who have been away in the dark too long, and cannot fit in the world again. Look at Frodo Baggins, at someone like Rimbaud, or at all these soldiers coming back from Vietnam and Iraq who shoot themselves or their relatives... darkness changes you. And that's also Snape's problem...we'll see... Would like to hear your feedback, but please, if you want to hate Sirius, do so for something he actually is, not because he looks like someone who offended you...or am I mistaken? Hugs Chrusotoxos From foxmoth at qnet.com Thu Nov 18 23:23:47 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2004 23:23:47 -0000 Subject: Harry left at the Dursleys (Was Re: Plot in OotP) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118158 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "lupinlore" wrote: > The question is about why didn't interfere with the Dursleys' abuse. I, like you, can't buy the whole "life's lessons" argument. Nor can I believe that Dumbledore is restrained by his "goodness." It's hard to argue under any reasonable definition of goodness that Dumbledore would somehow be less noble for restraining the Dursleys than for letting them "make their own choices." < > > The only definitions of goodness that could apply here are 1)he > genuinely fears that if he intervenes it would lead to Harry's death, > or 2) he feels if he intervenes it would be bad for the wizarding > world. Pippin: But what about 3) if he intervenes it will just make things worse for Harry? It would be nice if somebody from the WW could gently counsel the Dursleys, but they're far too terrified of wizards for that--and the wizards are just too culturally different to know how to be anything but terrifying to Muggles. We saw what happened when the WW intervened to see that Harry got his letters. The Dursleys went nuts. Vernon was ready to kill somebody, and if Hagrid hadn't broken the gun, it might well have been Petunia -- and where would Harry have been then? Pippin From annegirl11 at juno.com Fri Nov 19 00:02:08 2004 From: annegirl11 at juno.com (annegirl11 at juno.com) Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2004 19:02:08 -0500 Subject: DD as a grownup (was:Re: [HPforGrownups] Re: Plot in OotP Message-ID: <20041118.190239.252.0.annegirl11@juno.com> No: HPFGUIDX 118159 Renee said: > As for Dumbledore himself, as I see it he's set up as the > archetypical old mage found in traditional fairy stories and > folktales, knowledgeable but detached and not unlike the proverbial > puppetmaster. But then, as the series moves further away from the > fairytale, he slowly turns into a fallible and emotionally > vulnerable human being. To a degree, yes; DD is more human is Harry gets older. I still think grown adults shouldn't let DD boss them around as much as they do, or give him their unquestioning allegience. After all, that's no different than DEs mindlessly following Voldemort. But anyway, I wanted to add that DD is also a general in a war. He may be kind and sympathetic, but he is capable of cold-heartedness if that is what is necesary for the war effort. Keeping Harry with the Dursleys, imprisoning Sirius at 12GP; all things that were necesary for their bodily safety but emotionally cruel. DD makes the hard decisions because he's earned the right to; but you can't weild that kind of power without having a necesary side of cruelty. Just sayin. He's a beloved headmaster and slightly goofy old codger who's also active in government and running a war. DD oughn't be mistaken for a kindly old grandpa. Aura ~*~ "What he didn't like about heroes was that they were usually suicidally gloomy when sober and homicidally insane when drunk." - Discword http://archive.skyehawke.com/authors.php?no=606 From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Fri Nov 19 00:31:01 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2004 00:31:01 -0000 Subject: The length of the Pensieve Scene In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118160 Curlyhornedsnorkack wrote : " -In the scene, the sun is shining. Lots of people are going out to enjoy the great outdoors. The Marauders choose the shade of a beech tree, which allows quite a bit of sun through the leaves. Snape chooses the "dense shadow of a clump of bushes". If you prefer dense shadow, the best place to stay is indoors." Del replies : I happen to love being outside when the weather is bright and sunny, but I will then systematically look for a nice patch of shade. We know from book 1 that Snape likes cold and dark places. His classroom and office are in the dungeons. In fact, the Slytherin common room is there too. So I see nothing strange in a Slytherin boy preferring the shade and the cool, his, er, natural environment ;-) to the sun and the hot. Curlyhornedsnorkack wrote : "-When Snape is in the dense shade, Harry isn't studying Snape to see whether he is really looking at the exam questions, so we can't see what he's doing. But when Snape's nickname is called, Harry thinks that Snape looks like he has been expecting an attack." Del replies : When I was still living at home, I knew instantly from her tone of voice when my mom was not happy with me. I suspect this is similar to what happens in that scene : when James calls him Snivellus loudly, Snape knows instantly what's going to happen. Curlyhornedsnorkack wrote : " -If Snape is so engrossed in his exam questions, he could not incorporate into his memory words he couldn't hear. He would be too busy to have any awareness of whole discussions. But Snape manages to incorporate into his memory a discussion that is heard behind another group of people. In comparison, as far as we can tell, Harry only hears undistinguished chattering and laughing from the girls nearby." Del replies : We don't know what Harry would have heard if he had actually tried to *listen* to those girls. But he was completely bent on listening to the Marauders. In my opinion, he would have understood and followed the girls' conversation without any problem if he had tried. In fact, I'm pretty sure that Harry would have noticed if the girls' chattering had made no sense. We hear much more than we realise. Have you never noticed how you can be completely engrossed in something, and yet you will sometimes react instantly when someone says your name ? That's because your ears have actually been listening to everything, but you haven't been processing their information consciously. I believe the Pensieve works the same way. People's brain records much more than people remember, but all that information is transferred into the Pensieve anyway. Curlyhornedsnorkack wrote : "-Snape and the Marauders are about Harry's age in the scene, so, assuming that Snape and the Marauders started in the same year, they have had time to get to know each other pretty well. Lupin tells Harry later that James and Snape have hated each other from the start. Yet Snape just happens to stay close enough to his enemies to hear the conversation, and, when they stride off across a lawn (I think we can assume there is no path) he happens to go in the same direction." Del replies : And so do the girls. I can see at least 3 explanations for Snape's behaviour, other than yours : - He meant to go to the lake all along, and it's a coincidence if the Marauders wanted to go there too at the same time. After all, the lake seems to be a popular place for students to relax. - He wasn't paying attention to where he was going, and he just followed the group of girls. - He deliberately followed the group of girls :-) Curlyhornedsnorkack wrote : "Finally, we have to examine Snape's reasons for hiding such a long memory from Harry. If Snape doesn't care about the early part of the memory, why would he hide it from Harry? Perhaps hiding his snooping ways from Harry was important to Snape. It's interesting to me that in this case Snape would not realize that Harry is more interested in watching his father and his friends interact than watching Snape snoop." Del replies : If that's all Sirius (or was it Lupin ?) meant by saying that Snape was spying on them, then I have to call that accusation unfounded ! I'm sure Snape has many more memories of real, *obvious* snooping. You might be right, he might have been snooping. But your evidence is not really convincing I'm afraid. I would personally say that the likeliest explanation is that Snape was following one of the girls. I did that all the time when I was his age, pretending to inadvertently go to all the same places as any boy I fancied :-) Del From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Fri Nov 19 00:48:09 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2004 00:48:09 -0000 Subject: Did DD lie about the Prophecy? / Sirius In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118161 I, Del, wrote previously : "2.2. Sirius cracks under torture and reveals that Peter is the SK. After that, all LV has to do is grab Peter, and he will obtain the Secret very easily, even if Peter is a good guy. I still fail to see how the SK switch was such a brilliant idea." Finwitch replied : "You forgot something: LV is a Legilimens. He could use that with Sirius for the secret while torturing him. However, he can't find it, because Sirius isn't the SK. He may stubbornly go on with Sirius and get nowhere." Del replies : Using Legilimency, he could perfectly find out that Sirius is NOT the SK, in which case he would then look for information about who the SK is, and find out about Peter. Whether LV would have used torture or Legilimency doesn't change the fact that he would have found about Peter, in time. Finwitch wrote : "Sirius' capture itself would have alerted the Order (who of course knew where Potters were, and thought Sirius was the SK)" Del replies : Only the SK can tell other people about the Secret. So unless Peter used the paper trick (writing the Secret on a piece of paper) and made it look like it was Sirius who wrote it, there's no way anyone could know about the Secret without also knowing that the real SK was Peter. Finwitch wrote : " and they could have *moved* in time. So, Voldemort hears the Secret, about where Potters live, too LATE. They have already gone to Hogwarts/HQ of the Order/someplace else, this time with Dumbledore as SK." Del replies : You're making 2 assumptions : 1. that Sirius's absence would have been noticed right away. That would imply that all the members kept in close contact, which is not something we were ever told. In fact, according to Sirius, nobody noticed that *Peter* had disappeared, until Sirius went to check on him. 2. that it would have taken forever for LV to get the truth out of Sirius. As far as we know, Sirius is no Occlumens, and he is very easily ruled by his emotions. According to Snape, that would make him a very easy prey for LV. Del From easimm at yahoo.com Thu Nov 18 23:18:20 2004 From: easimm at yahoo.com (curlyhornedsnorkack) Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2004 23:18:20 -0000 Subject: The length of the Pensieve Scene In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118162 > Carol responds: > ... > As far as I can see, Severus is doing nothing wrong in the early > part of the memory. He is writing detailed exam answers and then > studying the questions to be sure he got them right. For some > reason, the DADA exam was very important to him, and this > information is an integral part of the memory, both from Snape's > perspective and from JKR's. > > I see nothing suspicious in Snape's actions here. They're both > natural and in character. (I do think he may have wanted a good > reason to and the Occlumency lessons, which clearly weren't working, > but that's another topic.) I think Snape is angry that Harry has seen > him humiliated, angrier still that he has violated his privacy and > shown himself untrustworthy, and perhaps afraid that Harry has seen > the other memories that he deposited in the Pensieve as well. Even if we do leave out the characteristics of the pensieve, on which we don't agree, (and not everyone seems to either, and I'm not interested in discussing it any further for the foreseeable future) Snape's actions are still suspicious. Can you address the character's motives for taking advantage of a beautiful day to sit in a dense shade? Why didn't he set off for a nicer place, most likely the shade of the tree under which the Marauders settled, if he was unaware of them? Or why didn't he sit closer to the girls? We are told that this scene takes place in the 5th year, that the characters already hate each other and (by Sirius in OOTP) have had frequent altercations. What is a person like Snape, disliked by many and embattled by the talented but cruel Marauders, someone who's used to having to defend himself on a regular basis, doing absent-mindedly wandering around? I agree that Snape's actions are natural and in character, which is why I enjoy JKR's work. But his actions can also be those of a sneak. I agree completely that Snape felt humiliated, angry that Harry violated his privacy and is afraid of what else Harry saw. (I don't think Snape is angry that Harry has proved himself untrustworthy, since Snape wouldn't trust Harry in any way.) One thing I thought of just after sending my last message is how much in character it would be for Snape to wonder what Harry thought of Snape sneaking around his fathers' friends, instead of realizing that Harry would rather watch his father than Snape. Snape seems to take what Harry does or is as somehow related to Snape. Examples: accusing Harry of making Neville look bad to look good in front of Snape(SS/PS), and the hospital scene after the rescue of Sirius(POA). I was wondering what you meant when you said > "DADA exam was very important to him, and this information is an > integral part of the memory, both from Snape's perspective and from > JKR's." Is there a JKR quote that goes along with this about this scene? "curlyhornedsnorkack" From lethe_lupin at yahoo.com Thu Nov 18 23:21:16 2004 From: lethe_lupin at yahoo.com (nomi olsthoorn) Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2004 15:21:16 -0800 (PST) Subject: SNAPE the coward? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041118232116.59272.qmail@web61107.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 118163 chrusotoxos wrote: (major snip) >> I've heard that some guys are sure that Snape was in the circle that night, and at one moment I was almost convinced...but there's still the fact, that, back in the hospital wing, Snape flinched when he heard that Malfoy was there...why would he? I mean, if he was there too, he must have known that Malfoy was there, because Voldemort called him by name. << Now my guess is that Snape flinches because he's afraid that he was recognized in the circle as well... bye, Lethe (New here and convinced I'm not the first to mention this, but still...) From jlnbtr at yahoo.com Thu Nov 18 23:24:13 2004 From: jlnbtr at yahoo.com (Juli) Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2004 15:24:13 -0800 (PST) Subject: Magic by kids (was: "Conjured" food) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041118232413.18456.qmail@web53104.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 118164 > Potioncat: > I'm talking about in GoF, when Harry and Hermione were > staying at the Weasleys around the time of the World > Cup. (It happens again in OoP at 12GP when the twins > use every possible opportunity to use magic now that > they can.) I remember thinking it was strange that > they couldn't do magic in their own homes for > household purposes. Juli: Weird yes, but I think they can do magic, as long as it is wandless magic; the twins did lots of magic at home before their 17th birthday, just not charms with a wand, they could do potions or whatever they did to create their stuff. > >>Vivamus > What about all the kids who know lots of magic > (e.g., Snape and hexes) before they even come to > Hogwarts? What about all the stories about kids > hexing each other, charming objects (Ron's > pillow/spider), etc., while growing up? If none > of them could use any magic at all before coming > to Hogwarts, and it was monitored by the Ministry, > it would strain credibility. > snip Juli: I was just thinking what if kids can only get a wand when they are accepted at Hogwarts, before then they could do accidental magic (Ron's pillow, the girls at the Quidditch Cup with brooms), or potions, reading, whatever they like, as long as it's not 'active' magic. I think it would be extremely hard for kids in wizard families spending 11 years without doing any magic, so I guess they must steal their parent's wand and do some little meaningless magic but still illegal, I just don't think the MoM pays much attention to it. Juli From jlnbtr at yahoo.com Thu Nov 18 23:47:01 2004 From: jlnbtr at yahoo.com (Juli) Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2004 15:47:01 -0800 (PST) Subject: SNAPE the coward? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041118234702.49704.qmail@web53101.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 118165 --previous posts snipped-- chrusotoxos wrote: > I've heard that some guys are sure that Snape was in > the circle that night, and at one moment I was almost > convinced...but there's still the fact, that, back in > the hospital wing, Snape flinched when he heard that > Malfoy was there...why would he? I mean, if he was > there too, he must have known that Malfoy was there, > because Voldemort called him by name. So my reasoning > is that he could not have been there - Juli now: Let's remember that you CAN'T dispparate from Hogwarts, Voldemort must know Snape is in Hogwarts and since he studied there he must know the no-apparate law, or LV placed Snape in Hogwarts as a spy, maybe someday we'll find out. Right after talking to Fudge on GoF, Dumbledore assigns tasks: he asks Hagrid and Mme Maxime to his office (to send them after the giants), Bill went to let Arthur know about what happened, Sirius went to get the old OoP members (Remus, Moody, Mrs Figg), and Snape already knew what he had to do, and he actually seemed scared about it, so I guess he went to find LV and say what they all did "how great to see you back sir" and started his work for the OoP undercover with the DEs. He must have told LV "Sorry sir, you know I was at Hogwarts and I couldn't dispparate, and DD was there and I didn't want him to suspect, so here I am, a little late but still your most loyal servant." If Snape didn't go to Voldemort, his work would be over, he could no longer spy for the Order and his life would be at great risk, so I guess he went, but after the DEs had left. Juli From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Fri Nov 19 01:39:17 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2004 01:39:17 -0000 Subject: Harry left at the Dursleys (Was Re: Plot in OotP) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118166 Alla wrote : " Believe me, I am very upset with Dumbledore, but I don't see how it makes him bad person if he honestly thought that the only place Harry can survive will be Dursleys. To make a long story short - what do you think is better nickname for Dumbledore "the accomplice in Harry's abuse or "the accomplice in Harry's death"?" Del replies : Tonks, Mad-Eye, Lupin and the Weasleys seem to think that there's no reason to choose, at the end of OoP. They have no problem letting Harry go back to Privet Drive while at the same time ensuring that he will be treated correctly. DD could have given at least the smallest incentive to the Dursleys to treat Harry correctly. He could have tried dropping by unexpectedly, he could have visited the boy regularly, he could have written to the boy, or whatever. Just let the Dursleys remember that there's someone else guarding over Harry. For crying out loud, he didn't even care that the boy was fed horrible lies about his *parents* who died for him ! DD did not HAVE to leave the Dursleys completely unsupervised for 10 years. Unless of course that was part of the stinking contract. Del From navarro198 at hotmail.com Fri Nov 19 01:45:12 2004 From: navarro198 at hotmail.com (scoutmom21113) Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2004 01:45:12 -0000 Subject: Plot in OotP In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118167 Kim wrote: Maybe over the coming years, after she finishes the series, she'll go back to the books, do some editing, and publish "new and improved" versions, and then we'll all be happy... Bookworm: I couldn't find any 2004 quotes at Quick Quotes, but I remember reading a few months ago that JKR would like to do just that. If you look at the writing style between the first and the fifth books, she has obviously grown as a writer. It will be interesting to see what she changes if she does actually make a "director's cut". Ravenclaw Bookworm From MadameSSnape at aol.com Fri Nov 19 01:47:52 2004 From: MadameSSnape at aol.com (MadameSSnape at aol.com) Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2004 20:47:52 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: SNAPE the coward? Message-ID: <110.3d2cb627.2eceaac8@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 118168 In a message dated 11/18/2004 8:10:21 PM Eastern Standard Time, lethe_lupin at yahoo.com writes: chrusotoxos wrote: (major snip) >> I've heard that some guys are sure that Snape was in the circle that night, and at one moment I was almost convinced...but there's still the fact, that, back in the hospital wing, Snape flinched when he heard that Malfoy was there...why would he? I mean, if he was there too, he must have known that Malfoy was there, because Voldemort called him by name. << ========== Sherrie here: Perhaps it's just me, but I never read that as a "flinch". I read it as an abortive movement in an attempt to shut Harry up before he said more than was good for all of them. Sherrie [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Fri Nov 19 02:02:51 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2004 02:02:51 -0000 Subject: Harry left at the Dursleys (Was Re: Plot in OotP) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118169 Pippin wrote : " We saw what happened when the WW intervened to see that Harry got his letters. The Dursleys went nuts." Del replies : Nope. Vernon only went nuts when the letters kept coming. But Harry's circumstances improved greatly after the first letters : he was moved to the spare bedroom for example. This to me indicates that the smallest sign that they were being watched would have encouraged the Dursleys to treat Harry a bit more decently. Too much interference would indeed have probably resulted in Vernon losing his head, but just a bit seems like it would have had a very nice effect. Del From navarro198 at hotmail.com Fri Nov 19 02:20:45 2004 From: navarro198 at hotmail.com (scoutmom21113) Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2004 02:20:45 -0000 Subject: Ron and the Centaurs (WAS: Plot in OotP) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118170 Annemehr: I also wonder why we had to miss Ron's Quidditch triumph. Bookworm: Because for some reason it is important to keep Ron either out of the Forbidden Forest or away from the centaurs. IIRC, the only centaur Ron has met is Firenze - when he because the Divination Teacher. PS/SS - Ron was in the hospital wing whtn Harry, Neville, Hermione, and Draco went on detention with Hagrid. Harry met Bane and Ronan. CoS - Harry and Ron follow the spiders and meet Aragog. PoA - Ron was in the hospital again when TT!Harry and TT!Hermione were in the Forest with Sirius. GoF - Hagrid took Harry around the edge of the Forest to see the dragons. Later, Harry and Krum were talking at the edge of the Forest when Crouch Senior appeared. OoP - Harry and Hermione go into the Forest with Hagrid to meet Grawp while Ron was playing Quidditch. Later Harry and Hermione lead Umbridge there. Grawp, Umbridge and the centaurs were gone before Ron and the others found Harry and Hermione. Harry has been in, or at least on the edge of, the Forest in every book, and has met the centaurs twice. Hermione has been in the Forest three times and has been with Harry both times he met the sentaurs. Ron has only been in the Forest twice, and has never met the centaurs. Somehow I doubt this is just coincidence. Ravenclaw Bookworm From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Fri Nov 19 02:28:37 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2004 02:28:37 -0000 Subject: DD as a grownup (was:Re: [HPforGrownups] Re: Plot in OotP In-Reply-To: <20041118.190239.252.0.annegirl11@juno.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118171 Aura wrote: snip. > But anyway, I wanted to add that DD is also a general in a war. He may be > kind and sympathetic, but he is capable of cold-heartedness if that is > what is necesary for the war effort. Keeping Harry with the Dursleys, > imprisoning Sirius at 12GP; all things that were necesary for their > bodily safety but emotionally cruel. DD makes the hard decisions because > he's earned the right to; but you can't weild that kind of power without > having a necesary side of cruelty. Alla: Oh, of course. The question is though whether he at least tries to remember that his soldiers are human beings. If he could somehow avoid leaving Harry with Dursleys while assuring at the same time that Harry will live, in my book he would be no better than Voldemort. The thing is I am more and more inclined to think that he could not be sure that Harry will live otherwise. Dumbledore having Sirius locked up... I ranted about it many times too and in this situation, I still don't buy that he had no other choice, I just don't buy it. In Harry case, JKR let us know that he would be safest,where his mother blood dwells. Was GP 12 a safe place for Sirius? Not really, because he run away from this house when he was a teenager and made him stay there was beyond cruel, IMO. Dumbledore is old, very old, he must have been a little less clueless about psychology of the people he was in charge with. I am not even sure about assuring Sirius bodily safety. He could have done tasks for the Order as Padfoot or under Invisibility cloack. I think knowing his nature, Dumbledore SHOULD have taken that risk, even if it would risk Sirius' bodily safety. Grrr. Aura: > Just sayin. He's a beloved headmaster and slightly goofy old codger who's > also active in government and running a war. DD oughn't be mistaken for a > kindly old grandpa. Alla: No, definitely not. From foxmoth at qnet.com Fri Nov 19 02:34:05 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2004 02:34:05 -0000 Subject: Harry left at the Dursleys (Was Re: Plot in OotP) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118172 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "delwynmarch" wrote: > > Pippin wrote : > " We saw what happened when the WW intervened to see that Harry got his letters. The Dursleys went nuts." > > Del replies : > Nope. Vernon only went nuts when the letters kept coming. But Harry's circumstances improved greatly after the first letters : he was moved to the spare bedroom for example. < Um, not really. Harry was moved, but the letters kept coming because Harry wasn't getting them. The next day Vernon was already boarding up the mail slot and trying to hammer nails with a slice of fruitcake. That was his reaction to being watched--his reaction to being pressured was to buy a gun and take his family on the run--even Dudley thought he'd gone mad. Vernon was hoping the letters would go away, but if they had, Harry would have found himself back in the cupboard in short order, with extra punishments for all the trouble he'd caused. Aunt Petunia and Uncle Vernon did treat Harry differently once he'd returned from Diagon Alley--but by then Harry had a wand. Petunia at least would know what that meant. Without one, I doubt that pressure from outside would have worked. It's Harry's ability to defend himself that made the Dursleys treat him differently, IMO. Pippin From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Fri Nov 19 03:00:44 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2004 03:00:44 -0000 Subject: Ron and the Centaurs (WAS: Plot in OotP) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118173 > Bookworm: Because for some reason it is important to keep Ron either out of the Forbidden Forest or away from the centaurs. IIRC, the only centaur Ron has met is Firenze - when he because the Divination Teacher. snip. Harry has been in, or at least on the edge of, the Forest in every book, and has met the centaurs twice. Hermione has been in the Forest three times and has been with Harry both times he met the sentaurs. Ron has only been in the Forest twice, and has never met the centaurs. Somehow I doubt this is just coincidence. Alla: Hmmm. Do you think when Ron meets other centaurs, some interesting plot revelations will follow? With centaurs being much more adept in the reading of what future holds, will they tell us what in store for Ron? On the other hand, Firenze did not say anything when he met Ron. Is it somehow connected with the possibility of Ron being a Seer? Maybe he will predict something important for Centaurs. Is it possible that Ron's abilities will manifest itself only aafter brain attack, as it was speculated earlier? From bob.oliver at cox.net Fri Nov 19 02:50:12 2004 From: bob.oliver at cox.net (lupinlore) Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2004 02:50:12 -0000 Subject: Harry mastering his emotions in HPB (was: Plot in OotP) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118174 SSSusan wrote: > This is one of the reasons I've proposed before [and taken some > grief for doing so, I might add :-)] that Harry will manage to > find a way to work w/ Snape, even if Snape keeps on being a prick. > I think JKR will show us a Harry who comes to be ready to really > focus on ending VoldyWarII. He may resist for awhile, he may be > too upset for awhile, but I think he'll come 'round, and I think > a part of that will mean his KNOWING he'll have to work w/ everyone > in the Order, no matter his personal feelings and his belief that > he's despised by at least one of them. Oh dear. Well, I suppose that's one way to solve it, but IMO would be a very unsatisfactory way indeed. A thread like Snape's cries out for resolution, and I just can't see any way for that to happen unless Snape either 1) changes, or 2) dies. Granted that this is Harry's story, as I have pointed out myself. Still, having Severus be nothing more than an unchanging obstacle, a lesson in working with difficult people, would IMO be a huge cop out on JKR's part. Worse, turning Harry into a turn-the-other cheek martyr, especially if there is also an emphasis on how both Harry and Voldy came from similar childhoods but made different choices, would risk turning the whole story into a moral allegory approaching some of C.S. Lewis' work. Now, I have nothing against moral allegory per se, and since Lewis was up front about being a Christian Apologist I expect it from him, but that kind of turn just doesn't seem, IMO, to be very, well, inspired when it comes the HP series. I grant you all of this is *a* way to bring these issues to a head and a close. But if JKR goes this route it would strike me as -- and I know this is a strong word but it really does describe how I would feel -- insipid. Lupinlore From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Fri Nov 19 03:39:25 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2004 03:39:25 -0000 Subject: Harry mastering his emotions in HPB (was: Plot in OotP) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118175 Lupinlore: Oh dear. Well, I suppose that's one way to solve it, but IMO would be a very unsatisfactory way indeed. A thread like Snape's cries out for resolution, and I just can't see any way for that to happen unless Snape either 1) changes, or 2) dies. >Granted that this is Harry's story, as I have pointed out myself. Still, having Severus be nothing more than an unchanging obstacle, a lesson in working with difficult people, would IMO be a huge cop out on JKR's part. Worse, turning Harry into a turn-the-other cheek martyr, especially if there is also an emphasis on how both Harry and Voldy came from similar childhoods but made different choices, would risk turning the whole story into a moral allegory approaching some of C.S. Lewis' work. snip. Alla: Bravo! That is exactly how I feel. I think it will be my new slogan "Snape, change or die!" :o) I would prefer him to change than to die though. I share your feelings but I do think that JKR is going that route. She did say after all that lewis is one of her favourite writers. I at least hope that Martyr!Harry will not be "turn-the -other cheek" Martyr forever. For example even if he decides to not pay attention to Snape abuse of him for the sake of killing Voldy, I hope he lets Snape have what is long overdue for him after Voldie is gone. I am still hoping though that they will learn to respect each other at the end, if not, well that I am keeping my fingers crossed that Harry will save Snape's life. :) From bob.oliver at cox.net Fri Nov 19 03:17:51 2004 From: bob.oliver at cox.net (lupinlore) Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2004 03:17:51 -0000 Subject: DD as a grownup (was: Re: Plot in OotP) In-Reply-To: <20041118.190239.252.0.annegirl11@juno.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118176 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, annegirl11 at j... wrote: > But anyway, I wanted to add that DD is also a general in a war. He > may be kind and sympathetic, but he is capable of cold-heartedness > if that is what is necessary for the war effort. Keeping Harry with > the Dursleys, imprisoning Sirius at 12GP; all things that were > necessary for their bodily safety but emotionally cruel. DD makes > the hard decisions because he's earned the right to; but you can't > wield that kind of power without having a necessary side of cruelty. Once again, a perfectly plausible explanation, but it runs yet again into JKR's statements about Dumbledore. She not only said he is a good person, she said he *is* goodness. The only comments she has made that come close to this issue are that he "unwillingly allows Harry to confront some hard realities he would rather protect him from" so that Harry will be able to *survive*. JKR seems to work very hard to excise all notion of "harshness" or "cruelty" from discussion of Dumbledore. About the only possible exception is when she mentions that he tolerates Snape because he teaches the students some important life lessons, and even there she makes it clear that this is something he believes to be in the interest of the *students* not of Hogwarts or wizarding society. Therefore, it seems counter to her statements to postulate that Dumbledore does this or that "for the sake of the war effort." She seems to believe he acts for the interest of the person involved. Thus she seems to want us to take at face value that he placed Harry at the Dursleys because he was trying to keep *Harry* alive, and that he had Sirius stay at Grimmauld Place because he was trying to keep *Sirius* alive. Let me offer a possible explanation/commentary that might be in line with these statements of JKR. Dumbledore we know is around 150 years old. Maybe many of his actions fall into the category of "old man's mistakes." When you are 150, I suppose a lot of things look rather ephemeral, and it is easy to adopt a detached attitude. Dumbledore seems to do this with emotional issues, and I believe it is a natural part of his personality, not a strategy for winning the war or manipulating people or anything else. He has lived so long he has learned that time heals wounds and that goals have a way of fading into dust, and he just can no longer appreciate the depths of pain and emotion experienced by people with a different perspective. He admits as much about Snape, and comes close to admitting it about Sirius. As for Harry, this is somewhat harder to comprehend, but if he honestly believed Petunia might come around, and he honestly didn't expect the extent of the Dursleys' abuse, I could see it. He might have thought "It will be dark and difficult but Petunia will come around eventually, and time will help alleviate the problems. On the whole it won't be any worse than a lot of other people experience in disturbed homes." I can see this more easily in the question of why he tolerates Snape. He might think "It's just a potions class anyway, and the students who learn to take it in that vein will be better off. Most of them will grow up to laugh at Snape's self-importance and shake their heads over how silly the whole thing was." Lupinlore From norek_archives2 at hotmail.com Fri Nov 19 04:18:45 2004 From: norek_archives2 at hotmail.com (Janet Anderson) Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2004 04:18:45 +0000 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Canon times two In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118177 >And don't forget the trophy that shows only the letters -HA....(to the >left of Percy's trohpy). I have speculated that perhaps these people >could be the one's who will be dead by the end of book 7. Since the ones we can see are mostly either dead or permanently damaged (Frank Longbottom), you may be right. There is one Weasley, but we can't see the first name. And I don't think the HA stands for Hagrid, because the trophies all have first and last names, and the letters are in the position where a first name would be, and Hagrid's first name is RUBEUS. Maybe it's Hannah Abbott. I have nothing against her, but better she should die than Harry. Janet Anderson From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Fri Nov 19 05:32:27 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2004 05:32:27 -0000 Subject: What make a "Qualified Wizard"? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118178 Vivamus wrote: I'm trying to recall if there is anything in canon about what makes a "qualified wizard". The only thing I can think of (other than age) is the OWLs. If that's so, that means Harry would no longer be under the underage decree, wouldn't it? John responded: > Actually, we do know when a person is allowed to use magic outside of school. If we look at Fred and George, they were not allowed to use > magic untill the summer leading into thier seventh year. We also know that at this time the twins are 17 because in GoF they are upset about not being able to compete in the TWT due to their not being 17. I am > positve 17 is the age where a wizard is able to do magic outside of > school, but I cannot think of where I read it. This means Harry will > not be able to do magic untill the summer leading into his 7th year > when he turns 17. > > John, who hopes he helped Carol responds: I don't think that being allowed to do magic outside of school is the same thing as being a "fully qualified wizard" (the correct expression, IIRC), which I think means someone who has finished his or her training and is qualified to do just about any job in the WW. Such a person could train to be a healer or an auror. Fred and George, in contrast, are now of age and have three OWLs each--more than enough to "qualify" them to run a shop in Diagon Alley--but they'll never get a job like Percy's since Percy has an impressive number of both OWLs and NEWTs and is almost certainly as much a "*fully* qualified wizard" as his father. At any rate, age alone is certainly not sufficient to "qualify" a wizard. Hagrid, for example, is in his sixties but his wand was broken and he's not allowed to practice magic (except under very particular circumstances). Moreover, he never finished his fifth (OWL) year at Hogwarts, let alone his seventh (NEWT) year. For various reasons, Hagrid is clearly not a "fully qualified wizard." I'm guessing that there are many other "unqualified" wizards, say Stan Shunpike, who is about nineteen in PoA and therefore young enough to have attended Hogwarts in Harry's first year, but there's no indication that he did so. If he wasn't in Hogwarts for what would have been his seventh year, he obviously has no NEWTs. Quite possibly he has no OWLs, either, and dropped out of Hogwarts because there was no point in attending for a sixth or seventh year because he wasn't eligible for any NEWTs classes. Probably he's allowed to practice simple spells, such as summoning charms, but as far as getting a job for which being a "fully qualified" wizard is a prerequisite, he might as well be a Squib. Even Tom, the toothless old innkeeper at the Leaky Cauldron, can light a fire using wandless magic, but chances are he's not a "fully qualified" wizard, either--a matter again, of education rather than of age. And just possibly, personal preference plays a role as well. Why bother with OWLs, much less NEWTs, if your goal in life is to be an innkeeper? To get back to Harry, he won't be able to (legally) use magic outside school (barring special dispensation or a change in the law) until he turns seventeen, between Books 6 and 7, and even then, despite earning several OWLs (I'm guessing at least four), he still won't be a "fully qualified wizard." If OWLs and being of age are all that matter, why return for a seventh year and why suffer through your NEWTs? Even Tom Riddle, who could have left to pursue his quest for immortality after murdering his parents, returned to Hogwarts? Why, even with the honor of being elected Head Boy, if he was already "fully qualified" by virtue of OWLs and age? Carol, who is only trying to reason things through with little more than "Career Advice" in OoP to guide her From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Fri Nov 19 05:59:00 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2004 05:59:00 -0000 Subject: Occlumency: Relax or resist? (Was: CHAPTER DISCUSSION: Chapter 29, Career Ad In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118179 Nora wrote: > > > The problem is, what's *really* being argued about here is not > > canon. Nope. It's about the proper interpretation of canon, > because texts sure don't interpret themselves. (I had a delightful > > archaeology professor who noted that 'facts do not speak for > > themselves'--this is in his spirit. I hope.) > > > Alla: > > LOL! Nora, I agree with you in this context, but I found the > phrase "facts do not speak for themselves" really funny, because in > the legal context facts often speak for themselves. > > Anyways, I agree with you, of course, I do. Interpretation is often > the key, because canon quotes are very often not clear at all. > > Besides if we were only allowed to argue with DIRECT canon support , > without interpretation, half of the theories would be deemed invalid > right now :o) Carol responds" For the record, I was both *presenting* and *interpreting* canon. What I was objecting to was having my arguments, their canon support, and their interpretation snipped away, called inadequate, and left unanswered. I never said that canon alone was sufficient, but I do think that canon is the best evidence we have and certainly superior to analogies. it's also rather difficult to interpret canon without quoting it first. I'm tempted to revive my original post, which was snipped and dismissed with a "sorry, but canon support isn't sufficient." Huh? And here I thought that's what this group was about. But never mind. The thread is dead. Carol, politely asking posters not to snip the whole argument they're responding to because the original argument gets lost that way. At the very least, quote the point you're responding to! (Talking to the group in general, not to Nora and Alla in particular.) From finwitch at yahoo.com Fri Nov 19 06:31:02 2004 From: finwitch at yahoo.com (finwitch) Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2004 06:31:02 -0000 Subject: Harry mastering his emotions in HPB (was: Plot in OotP) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118180 > Alla: > > Bravo! That is exactly how I feel. I think it will be my new > slogan "Snape, change or die!" :o) ---I > at least hope that Martyr!Harry will not be "turn-the -other cheek" > Martyr forever. > For example even if he decides to not pay attention to Snape abuse > of him for the sake of killing Voldy, I hope he lets Snape have what > is long overdue for him after Voldie is gone. Finwitch: I agree. After all, if you let that nastiness go on, you're like a house-elf. You know, those poor enslaved creatures who don't do anything to stand up against their mistreating masters, no matter how badly they're treated (and punish themselves if they do). We have enough of that martyr-stuff with the elves, I'd say. Trying to tolerate people in silence is not going to do anything to stop that nastiness, but quite possibly it will just get worse. But - you know, I think that most humans wouldn't hit a person who's challenging them to hit again instead of hitting back. Or Dumbledore's calm 'go ahead and break my stuff. I dare say I have too many' most certainly DID stop Harry's anger. (Detentions and such would only give it more fuel, you know...) Finwitch From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Fri Nov 19 06:59:37 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2004 06:59:37 -0000 Subject: Harry left at the Dursleys (Was Re: Plot in OotP) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118181 Lupinlore wrote: > > [Dumbledore] supposedly loves Harry but left him at the Dursleys without interfering with their abuse. > And you are right, the thing about not forcing people . . . essentially makes him an accomplice through inaction. It is one thing to decide for yourself not to object to abuse. It is quite another to stand aside and let someone ELSE be abused, particularly a defenseless person and particularly a child. > > If it goes this way I would acknowledge that JKR has connected the > > dots, but not in a very skillful way if she truly wants us to > believe that Dumbledore is "the epitome of goodness." > > > > But, as Alla says, we will have to see. Perhaps she will indeed > > manage to come up with some explanation that saves Dumbledore from > > looking either foolish or an accomplice. > > Alla responded: > > Well, that is not exactly what I meant. It is a given that > Dumbledore left Harry with Dursleys and if we believe what he said > at the end of OOP (which I am inclined to), he loves Harry. > > So, I was asking whether you consider it to be good plotting or > good "connecting of the dots" if the answer to the question why > Dumbledore left Harry there to be abused will be simple - Dumbledore > has to chose between Harry's survival and the abuse. > > Believe me, I am very upset with Dumbledore, but I don't see how it > makes him bad person if he honestly thought that the only place > Harry can survive will be Dursleys. > > To make a long story short - what do you think is better nickname > for Dumbledore "the accomplice in Harry's abuse or "the accomplice > in Harry's death"? Carol adds: Good point, Alla! Dumbledore really had no choice that I can see. LV was gone but not dead, and at least some of the DEs (the Lestranges and Barty Jr.) were at large and very dangerous. Harry had to be hidden, and the blood protection made possible by Lily's sacrifice (not to be confused with any charm Lily herself may have put on him before GH) was his best, if not his only, chance for survival. We also know that Dumbledore did not want Harry to be raised as a "pampered little prince," adored and quite possibly spoiled. He must not know that he was special until he was ready to understand what it really meant to be the Boy Who Lived (paraphrasing from SS/PS chapter 1 and elsewhere). The consequences of such an upbringing, supposing he survived to school age, might have been disastrous. He might have become as arrogant as his father or worse (after all, his father was only a star Quidditch player; he was the infant prodigy who somehow defeated Voldemort). Or he might have become soft and coddled, used to having every whim catered to (a la Dudley and to some extent, Draco). I'm not saying that Dumbledore approved of the Dursley's occasional abuse and frequent (or chronic) neglect. But to interfere might have made matters worse, and the bad upbringing did have its advantages. Harry already knew how to evade Dudley's bullying (at least some of the time) through quick movements and accidental magic. He was thin but tough; he was resourceful and resilient; he could endure hardship (insufficient food, sleeping on the floor with a rag for a blanket at the hut on the island, spiders in his cupboard). He could endure taunts of schoolmates who laughed at his clothes and broken glasses. I'm not saying that the Dursleys were right to mistreat Harry, but I think that Dumbledore--if he knew about the abuse--probably realized that it was not extensive enough to harm him permanently, either physically or psychologically. It was not, in fact, all that different from the upbringing of many a child in the Depression era, when food and clothing were sparse and oranges were appreciated as rare treats in children's stockings at Christmas time. At least Harry had a real bathroom to use and not an outhouse, and he was not beaten with a pepper tree switch or similar instrument of torture on the "spare the rod, spoil the child" principle. Dumbledore knew that Harry was in for hard times, that he would suffer and be tested. It was better, probably, that he had some preparation for what he would be facing, that he could already endure hardship without losing his spirit rather than coming to Hogwarts never having suffered anything worse than a stomachache or a runny nose. It was better that he be raised by Muggles, not viewing himself as a hero for passively surviving a Killing Curse and unwittingly deflecting it back through no effort of his own. Yes, Harry's survival was the best, the chief, the wholly sufficient reason for placing him with the Dursleys. But there were other reasons, just as there are reasons for letting Snape teach Harry both Potions and Occlumency despite his sneers and occasional gratuitous zeroes. Harry will have to face an enemy far worse than the Dursleys or Snape, a Voldemort who (we hope!) has regained his power and terror, an enemy almost beyond Harry's strength. He may even have to kill that enemy (unless DD and Harry have misunderstood the Prophecy.) And everything he has undergone so far, from the cupboard at the Dursleys to Occlumency with Snape to the dragon in the TWT will help him to prepare for that ordeal. Had he been indulged like Draco (by his mother), he would be overconfident and far less prepared than he is even now. And it will get worse before it gets better, if it gets better at all. We have JKR's word for that. JMO. Carol From gbannister10 at aol.com Fri Nov 19 07:42:13 2004 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2004 07:42:13 -0000 Subject: Plot in OotP In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118182 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "scoutmom21113" wrote: > > Kim wrote: > Maybe over the coming years, after she finishes the series, she'll > go back to the books, do some editing, and publish "new and > improved" versions, and then we'll all be happy... > > Bookworm: > I couldn't find any 2004 quotes at Quick Quotes, but I remember > reading a few months ago that JKR would like to do just that. If > you look at the writing style between the first and the fifth books, > she has obviously grown as a writer. It will be interesting to see > what she changes if she does actually make a "director's cut". Geoff: Revision is not unknown among writers. Tolkien immediately springs to mind because, after all, he rewrote sections of the "Hobbit" (which was originally conceived as a "stand alone" book) after he started work on LOTR because they became part of the same canon. From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Fri Nov 19 07:51:55 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2004 07:51:55 -0000 Subject: The length of the Pensieve Scene In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118183 Carol earlier: > > ... > > As far as I can see, Severus is doing nothing wrong in the early > > part of the memory. He is writing detailed exam answers and then > > studying the questions to be sure he got them right. For some > > reason, the DADA exam was very important to him, and this > > information is an integral part of the memory, both from Snape's > > perspective and from JKR's. > > > > I see nothing suspicious in Snape's actions here. They're both > > natural and in character. (I do think he may have wanted a good > > reason to and the Occlumency lessons, which clearly weren't working, but that's another topic.) I think Snape is angry that Harry has seen him humiliated, angrier still that he has violated his privacy and shown himself untrustworthy, and perhaps afraid that Harry has seen > > the other memories that he deposited in the Pensieve as well. > > "curlyhornedsnorkack" responded: > Even if we do leave out the characteristics of the pensieve, on which we don't agree, (and not everyone seems to either, and I'm not > interested in discussing it any further for the foreseeable future) > Snape's actions are still suspicious. Can you address the character's motives for taking advantage of a beautiful day to sit in a dense shade? Why didn't he set off for a nicer place, most likely the shade of the tree under which the Marauders settled, if he was unaware of them? Or why didn't he sit closer to the girls? What is a person like Snape, disliked by many and > embattled by the talented but cruel Marauders, someone who's used to > having to defend himself on a regular basis, doing absent-mindedly > wandering around? I agree that Snape's actions are natural and in > character, which is why I enjoy JKR's work. But his actions can also > be those of a sneak. > > I agree completely that Snape felt humiliated, angry that Harry > violated his privacy and is afraid of what else Harry saw. (I don't > think Snape is angry that Harry has proved himself untrustworthy, > since Snape wouldn't trust Harry in any way.) Carol responds: Since you ask, I don't think he was paying any attention to where he was sitting. After all, he had his nose pressed to the parchment on which he was writing earlier and was writing detailed responses in a tiny hand. Now he's reading the exam paper closely, trying to make sure he got everything right and left nothing out. I don't see anything beyond obsession with his DADA mark; nothing sneaky about it. (I've been where he is, wholly oblivious to my surroundings, wrapped up in a book or an essay I was writing or my own thoughts.) And as I said and you conceded, it's in character for him. It *wouldn't* be in character for loner Snape to sit down with the girls or with MWPP. If he had they'd have startled him out of his reverie. And I do think it's important that the memory is not, AFWK, under the control of the person who remembers it. Harry can wander around in it and see and hear things that Severus didn't see and hear, just as he is hearing and seeing things that DD didn't in the earlier Pensieve scene, notably DD himself and Moody's mumbled words. What Harry does not see is what is directly in front of their eyes, e.g., the exact words that Severus is reading or writing. And he is definitely not inside their heads, as he would be in a subjective memory. Besides, if Snape could and did change the memory to make himself look innocent, as you seem to imply, why would he be angry that Harry saw the memory? I think Harry saw what really happened--more than Severus himself saw and heard--and Snape is angry at the violation of his private memory and the revelation of his humiliation at Harry's father's hands. I do think, based on Snape's willingness actually to praise Harry, or at least acknowledge that he did something right, that he was starting to respect him. He knew, for example, that Harry had not taken the gillyweed or the polyjuice potion ingredients from his office as he quite naturally suspected in GoF. I think that despite Harry's continued dislike of him and his failure to cooperate, Snape was trying to work with him, and that his anger, when it flared up, resulted from Harry's failure to recognize his danger and fight temptation. So when Harry again violated his trust, Snape was excessively angry because Harry was not, in his view, worthy of his respect after all. That's just my view, of course. But Snape as sneak? I don't see that anywhere. "curlyhornedsnorkack": > I was wondering what you meant when you said > > "DADA exam was very important to him, and this information is an > > integral part of the memory, both from Snape's perspective and from JKR's." > > Is there a JKR quote that goes along with this about this scene? Carol responds: I was responding to the idea at the beginning of this thread that the scene was too long, and that the first part of the memory isn't necessary. I think it *is* necessary to establish Severus's reasons for being so absorbed in the exam paper that he doesn't see MWPP or anyone else. He has what ought to be the comfort of knowing that he was the innocent victim of a two-pronged assault, so that part of the memory would be important to him, but it's also important to JKR or she wouldn't have put it inn. It's that portion of the memory, after all, that leads Harry to sympathize with Severus and to disapprove of his father and Sirius. That's what I meant by JKR's perspective: her point, her purpose in including the memory, would be incomprehensible without that first segment. I also find it interesting that young Severus, who was stigmatized by the adult Sirius Black for his interest in the Dark Arts, is intrigued, or rather obsessed, with *Defense Against* the Dark Arts, Harry's own best subject if he could only find a competetent teacher. You'd think it would be Dark Arts-hating James who was pressing his nose against the parchment squeezing the answers in, but he's more interested in Lily and tossing around a Snitch and transfiguring into a stag so he can run with a werewolf. Carol From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Fri Nov 19 08:10:24 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2004 08:10:24 -0000 Subject: SNAPE the coward? In-Reply-To: <20041118232116.59272.qmail@web61107.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118184 chrusotoxos wrote: > > (major snip) > > >> I've heard that some guys are sure that Snape was in the circle that night, and at one moment I was almost convinced...but there's still the fact, that, back in the hospital wing, Snape flinched when he heard that Malfoy was there...why would he? I mean, if he was there too, he must have known that Malfoy was there, because Voldemort called him by name. << > > > Now my guess is that Snape flinches because he's afraid that he was > recognized in the circle as well... > > bye, Lethe (New here and convinced I'm not the first to mention this, but still...) Carol responds: I think the movement (not necessarily flinching) is a red herring to undermine the reader's trust in snape yet again. It's pretty clear from his subsequent actions in Dumbledore's service and the fact that you can't apparate from Hogwarts or its grounds that he wasn't at the graveyard. And note that his reflection shows up in the Foe Glass along with DD's and McGonagall's, as it wouldn't if he were a loyal DE. Although there's some dispute about it on this list, I'm convinced that he's the one Voldemort believes has left forever, and that Voldemort will at some point actually try to kill him. (I happen to hope he doesn't succeed because I expect Snape to do something spectacular for the good side before the end.) Anyway, there are many threads on this topic, but I don't have time to search them out for you--sorry! To get back to the sudden movement, I think it has something to do with Snape's connection to Malfoy, but exactly what that connection is, and whether its strictly business or involves a Slytherinish sort of friendship that goes back to the days when Snape was eleven and Malfoy sixteen, I can only guess. But I highly doubt that Snape was in the graveyard. There would just not be time to sneak out of Dumbledore's sight, find a robe and mask, runt to Hogsmeade, apparate, disapparate as Harry disappeared with the portkey, run back to his office, take off the robe and mask, and return, breathless, to Dumbledore's side, quietly pretending he hadn't been anywhere. It makes much more sense that he explained later to Malfoy, or even to Voldemort himself, making use of his Occlumency, that you can't apparate from Hogwarts. BTW, I don't think he was surprised that Malfoy was there so much as surprised that Harry knew it. And I think that Voldemort himself would have been more careful about naming his Death Eaters in front of Harry if he hadn't expected Harry to be dead within the half hour. Carol, with apologies for repeating what she's frequently said before From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Fri Nov 19 08:23:29 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2004 08:23:29 -0000 Subject: Magic by kids (was: "Conjured" food) In-Reply-To: <20041118232413.18456.qmail@web53104.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118185 Juli wrote: > Weird yes, but I think they can do magic, as long as > it is wandless magic; the twins did lots of magic at > home before their 17th birthday, just not charms with > a wand, they could do potions or whatever they did to > create their stuff. > Vivamus responded: > > What about all the kids who know lots of magic > > (e.g., Snape and hexes) before they even come to > > Hogwarts? What about all the stories about kids > > hexing each other, charming objects (Ron's > > pillow/spider), etc., while growing up? If none > > of them could use any magic at all before coming > > to Hogwarts, and it was monitored by the Ministry, > > it would strain credibility. > > snip > > > Juli wrote: > I was just thinking what if kids can only get a wand > when they are accepted at Hogwarts, before then they > could do accidental magic (Ron's pillow, the girls at > the Quidditch Cup with brooms), or potions, reading, > whatever they like, as long as it's not 'active' > magic. I think it would be extremely hard for kids in > wizard families spending 11 years without doing any > magic, so I guess they must steal their parent's wand > and do some little meaningless magic but still > illegal, I just don't think the MoM pays much > attention to it. Carol notes: Certain types of wandless magic can be detected (e.g., Dobby's hover charm in CoS). The MoM didn't know who had performed the spell; they assumed it was Harry since he was the only known wizard in the area (and his Muggle relatives didn't own a house-elf). I think in a wizarding family, parents are supposed to monitor their children but they don't always succeed, and the MoM wouldn't know the difference between a charm performed by the Twins or one performed by their parents. I'm guessing that little Severus's parents didn't prevent him from learning all thoses hexes (or playing with potions), and Snape seemed to know that Draco (admittedly a second-year) could cast a Serpensortia, not the kind of spell he'd have learned at Hogwarts but one that his dad might have taught him. Also, Draco already knew how to ride a broom before coming to Hogwarts, certainly a form of magic, and a conspicuous one, too, if there are Muggles in the neighborhood. IOW, I think that some students are monitored more closely than others, and Harry is monitored more closely than anyone else. The underage magic restriction is probably impossible to enforce in all instances. Carol From bboyminn at yahoo.com Fri Nov 19 08:34:53 2004 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2004 08:34:53 -0000 Subject: Plot in OotP In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118186 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" wrote: > > Hickengruendler wrote: > > > > > > In a few recent posts, I read the opinion by some posters, that > > OotP has let Plot than the previous books. I think OotP was a > > very well plotted book, with one incident consequently leading to > > another. > -carolcaracciolo wrote: > > > > ...edited.. > > The writing was not NEARLY as compelling as her previous work. > > .... Maybe more time and another re-write would have helped? > > > > > > Carol bboyminn: To preface, I agree this book was not as compelling as others, and of course each person is entitled to their own /read/ of the books. But I find people picking fault with all the wrong things, which I will comment further on in this post. I didn't feel the same level of captivation with this latest book that I felt with the previous. But JKR is struggling to setup the rest of the story. In a sense, this book is the beginning of the end, and certain ground work needs to be laid. That's not always an easy task. I remember writing an extremely long and complex chapter in one of may own stories, a chapter with many complex twists and turns passing through several scenes and various emotional transitions when all I really want was one character to make one minor statement that left a clue that would pay off many chapters later; that chapter is +10,000 words. The point is that as an author working a simple clue or point into a story can be a very complex task, then trying to string the bit and pieces into one coherent story is even more complex. More on that later. > Carol (justcarol) responds: > > I liked Hickengruendler's cause/effect connections, which the other > Carol snipped, yet somehow I agree with Carol C. that OoP is awkward > and less compelling than the previous books. It's too long, for one > thing, and as Del was saying a few weeks ago, Harry is, well, too > full of anger, too unreasonable, for many readers to identify or > sympathize with. bboyminn: In addition to what I said above, this was indeed not a warm and cuddly book; it had a lot of lows and few highs. But as I said above, the author had a basic story and into that story had to weave specific bit of information, so of which had to appear without appearing to appear, if that makes any sense. > Carol continues: > > ... (I hope that Alice the dog-faced woman was not just a Mark > Evans, dropped in as a bit of background.) bboyminn: Alice - The Dog-Faced Woman??? Where was that? How could I have missed it? Really, is that in the book? > Carol continues: > > ... (I think Neri has made too much of the missing five hours of > Snape's time on the night of the DoM battle- ... discrepancy between > the time frame for Snape and the time frame for Harry does seem to > suggest that JKR didn't set up a chart or outline so that *she* knew > what Snape was doing. bboyminn: I'll keep this one short. I don't think there is a discrepancy. Snape has no reason to panic. As far as he is concerned, everything is under control until an hour or two after he finds out Harry and Friends are in the woods. Remember, he doesn't necessarily know about them being in the woods as soon as it happens. I suspect that sometime after Ron & Co escaped from Draco, Draco may have found Snape and told him. It's only when they don't come back, that Snape needs to begin to worry. At that time he alerts the Order, and while they know from Snape's previous enquiry what is on Harry's mind, they don't know what Harry intends to do; will he come to Grimmauld Place or go directly to the Ministry, will he try to find help or do it all himself. Or indeed has he actually done anything at all. Certainly we know all the answers, but the characters in the story have reasonable doubt sufficient to cause /some/ delays in their actions. > Carol Continues: > > It's like > the carelessness regarding wands in the graveyard scene of GoF: How > can Harry be holding his wand *and* the portkey in one hand and > dragging Cedric's body with the other? bboyminn: Others have responded, but what we really have here is a matter of reader perspective, reader perspective that has been inflamed by reader emotions. Not saying you are over emotional, just that you are filling in the spaces between lines in way that others surely don't see. Take the wand/portkey example; hold a ruler in your hand and pick up a coffee cup by the handle; it's really not that hard. Others mentioned that Harry isn't dragging Cedric anywhere, he's just holding his wrist. In addition, he doesn't really have to hold the entire portkey (Tri-Wiz Cup), he just has to touch the handle. Just like you can grasp a coffee cup handle while holding a ruler, all Harry has to do is get a finger or two around the handle and he's home free. Once the cup/portkey is touched and activated, you are stuck to it as it pulls you onward. The Doxie Scene- The Doxie cleaning scene is not even remotely about doxies, the cleaning is simply an excuse to get Harry in the room so We and Harry can discover the Black Family Tapastry and the many details it holds. The rest of the cleaning is just filler, transitional story connecting more significant events. Can't Stand Umbridge and Grawp? You're not suppose to like them. Umbridge is a mean, evil, sadistic, ruthless, cruel person, she is more than willing to destroy anyone in her path to serve her own ambitions and allegiances. I'm pretty sure we are suppose to hate and despise her. Grawp is not a likable character, he's dangerously big and more dangerously stupid. It's big, clumsy, stupid oafs like him that get muggles hurt and give giants a bad name. But he does serve a plot purpose. In this book, Grawps main purpose it to bleed on Harry and Hermione; that blood draws the Thestrals which JKR needs to enter the scene and provide unnaturally fast transport to London. Now, he may have more purpose in later books, so this is also his introduction, and on a more poignant note, he is also Hagrid's only living family. Battle at the Ministry of Magic lacking clarity? It's a long complex battle with a lot of different characters; it went on a long time and to keep it from going on endlessly, some minor details would need to be sacrificed by any author in order to keep things moving. In addition, I think to some extent, we aren't meant to have a crystal clear understanding of what happened to who. Who was the Purple Slash Curse wizard? Difficult to tell, but there may be a reason for that. Who was the Baby Head Death Eater? Is it more important to indentify him, or to move the story on to the next scene? Yes, we would like to know those details, but do we need to know, and would knowing serve the story at this point? > Carol Concludes: > > I hope that HBP is better; shorter, more tightly and carefully > plotted, more action-filled, more capable of arousing the reader's > sympathies. And I hope it begins to answer our questions about > everyone from Snape to Grindelwald, and especially about Godric's > Hollow. I wonder, though, if we'll ever find out what happened > during those missing twenty-four hours, or whether JKR even knows > that they're missing. > > Carol bboyminn: Again, I admit that OotP was not as captivating as the previous books. It's darker and more negative that the previous books. On the other hand, GoF is my favorite and CoS is my least favorite, however, in a recent re-reading of the series, I found CoS very captivating, and oddly, GoF slighly tedious... go figure. In addition, reader's attitude plays a big part. For all of us, the hype and anticipation surrounding the release of OotP was overwhelming. It's pretty hard for any book to live up to that overhype frenzied level of anticipation. Further, in a recent thread, Del and I (and others) were discussing our perception of the OWLs Voldemort/Sirius dream scene. Del immediately saw that something was wrong, the dream seemed very unlikely, and that put him off as he read it. I, on the other hand, was so eager to find our what happened next, that I was willing to overlook the unlikelihood of the dream. Again, the point is that the reader's mindset affects their reactions. Just a few thoughts. Steve/bboyminn (was bboy_mn) From hickengruendler at yahoo.de Fri Nov 19 08:39:22 2004 From: hickengruendler at yahoo.de (hickengruendler) Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2004 08:39:22 -0000 Subject: The length of the Pensieve Scene In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118187 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "curlyhornedsnorkack" wrote: > Even if we do leave out the characteristics of the pensieve, on which > we don't agree, (and not everyone seems to either, and I'm not > interested in discussing it any further for the foreseeable future) > Snape's actions are still suspicious. Can you address the character's > motives for taking advantage of a beautiful day to sit in a dense > shade? Why didn't he set off for a nicer place, most likely the shade > of the tree under which the Marauders settled, if he was unaware of > them? Or why didn't he sit closer to the girls? Hickengruendler: Sorry for my bluntness, but Snape can sit whereever he wants. Also, assuming that the memory is objective (which I'm sure it is. I know you are disagreeing, but let's assume for a moment it is), than it doesn't matter if Snape might have planned something. Because this had nothing to do with James and Sirius' motives. James and Sirius attacked Snape because they were bored, not because they suspected that Snape might attack them any minute. There is another scene that confirms the memory. When Harry told Sirius and Remus about the incident, they didn't deny it. They didn't say: "Well, the Pensieve is not objective. Snape started the fight." They didn't even protested when Harry blamed them for bullying Snape just because they were bored. Don't you think they would have said something, if the situation weren't the way it seemed? If not for their own sake, than surely for James'. I'm sure they don't want Harry to believe such things about his father, if James never did them. But instead they only said that James grew out of it, and that Snape wasn't an innocent angel either. Which I'm sure is the truth, but Sirius and Remus didn't do anything to correct Harry's view about James deeds in this scene. Hickengruendler From bboyminn at yahoo.com Fri Nov 19 09:26:50 2004 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2004 09:26:50 -0000 Subject: What make a "Qualified Wizard"? In-Reply-To: <200411170849233.SM01284@DEVBOX> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118188 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Vivamus" wrote: > > ... trying to recall if there is anything in canon about what makes > a "qualified wizard". The only thing I can think of (other than age) > is the OWLs. If that's so, that means Harry would no longer be under > the underage decree, wouldn't it? > > Does anyone have more canon information on this, perhaps from a JKR > interview? > > Vivamus bboyminn: I think the answer is much simpler than others have suggested, although, I'm not discounting the validity of what they said. Think of the real world as an example. Most students who graduate from High School, have their High School Diploma as their /qualifications/. That document certifies a certain level of competency and literacy which in turn qualifies them to do something more useful than digging ditches. However, most high school graduates are not of-age, that is, they are not 18 years old. Therefore, they are not adults, and don't have the legal privileges that go with being an adult. So, a 'Fully Qualified Wizard' is one that has as a minimum pasted a few OWLs. There degree or extent of their qualifications is a matter of the grade of their OWLs. A person with 8 Outstanding OWLs is more qualified that a person with 8 Acceptable OWLs. NEWTs are the highest qualification, and in the wizard world, are the equivalent of a college degree (probably, more like a two year Associate Degree). In short, 'Fully Qualified' means you have documented qualifications that are universally recognised. Although, in some cases, receiving /qualifications/ may mean moving from Apprentice to Journeyman. In other words, certified on-the-job training in a skilled craft. Independant of these qualifications, you are not afforded adult rights and responsibilities until you are Of-Age, which is 17 in the wizard world. Just some thoughts. Steve/bboyminn (was bboy_mn) From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com Fri Nov 19 11:57:07 2004 From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (arrowsmithbt) Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2004 11:57:07 -0000 Subject: The Second Prophecy plus a correction In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118189 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "chrusotoxos" wrote: > > So, back to Sirius. I ready your posts, Kneasy, and I'm not > convinced. But let me clarify something first: I don't like him all that lot! > Snape is defintely my favourite character, as it's yours, I guess. > Kneasy: If by favourite you mean most entertaining, then yes, Snape is my favourite character. I go along with W.C.Fields "Anyone who hates children and animals can't be all bad." > > Totally right again, even if I hate taking sides with a mother hen > such as Molly Weasley...:) Kneasy: Molly is the archetype of the old-fashioned English mum. They can be as irritating as hell, but my word! they fight like tigers if something threatens the equanimity of the the family circle - and she sees Harry as an honorary Weasley and Sirius as a threat. She'd never trust him. > > But all this doesn't mean that he's a DE or worse! > As for your other objections, here is my answer: > > About Sirius' flight from Azkaban, yeah, that's strange. But there > could be something JKR is not telling us. I mean, maybe normally they > had protection against animagi, but that day something went wrong > without Sirius knowing. There is no prison from which you can't > escape. > About the dementors: they were not going for Harry in PoA! They > need to feed, they were going for a large crowd of students (and > Harry fell down because of his personal weakness to them - totally > justified) and then for Sirius. They ignored Snape and Hermione and > went to Harry because he was trying to protect Sirius. Fudge was > trying to save him, not to kill him! I mean, same thing: Fudge is > playing his own political game, doesn't mean he wants Harry dead! He > could support Lucius because he doesn't realize how dangerous he is. > Sometimes you and a horrible guy think alike about a subject (ie, > Dumdledore is too old and arrogant), and Fudge didn't realize how > dangerous it was to make an alliance on this base. Kneasy: Ah, but he was in dog form at the Lake and was so badly affected by the Dementors (who weren't particularly close) that he was forced to transform back to human form. Why didn't that happen while sliding past them 'escaping' from Azkaban? And sorry, but they were concentrating on Harry: a whole crowd of them on the pitch staring up at him and after the SS they seemed to ignore Sirius entirely and were intent on getting Harry. As usual, I smell conspiracy (it's a habit I have). Sirius' 'escape' was an excuse to let loose the Dementors. Now it could be that Sirius was not a knowing participant in the plan, but it's much more fun if he's added to the list of suspects. > > Maybe Sirius had to die so that Harry wouldn't fear death anymore > (how worse it is to outlive a loved one? And Voldie can't know this, > since he doesn't love anyone), as someone said, but I also think that > Sirius couldn't survive. He's one of these characters who have been > away in the dark too long, and cannot fit in the world again. > > Would like to hear your feedback, but please, if you want to hate Sirius, > do so for something he actually is, not because he looks like someone > who offended you...or am I mistaken? > Kneasy: Yep. You're mistaken. I don't take HP that seriously. Don't take many aspects of life all that seriously either, an attitude which some deplore. Tough. All the theories I come up with are for entertainment value (mine mostly) or to provoke other posters (some of whom do seem to take some aspects of HP more seriously than I do). It's true that JKR has talked of the randomness of death, but it's a bit of a stretch from that to using it to teach a teenager not to fear it IMO. Unless she's getting him ready for the final showdown where he straps on his wand with an emotive speech "It's a far, far better thing I do now..." and bites the dust in Hogsmeade High Street. Meantime I'll keep taking potshots at Sirius and one or two others - at least until Jo proves me wrong. After all, she provided the canon on which I base my arguments. The least I can do is use it. From willsonkmom at msn.com Fri Nov 19 12:43:21 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2004 12:43:21 -0000 Subject: The length of the Pensieve Scene In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118190 Del snip > > I would personally say that the likeliest explanation is that Snape > was following one of the girls. I did that all the time when I was his > age, pretending to inadvertently go to all the same places as any boy > I fancied :-) > Potioncat: I've never read this idea before! Could make the whole event even worse if the girl he had a crush on saw it. I wonder if it was Florence? I agree with all of your points Del. I'm another one who always finds shade on a sunny day. Between photophobia and fair skin, bright sun isn't pleasant, even if fresh air is. Another thought I had was that in the Pensieve scene, the marauders are described in animal-like ways. Just happens to be the very animals they turn into. So I wondered if Snape was being described that way too, although I never came up with anything I could write up for the list. From willsonkmom at msn.com Fri Nov 19 12:53:26 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2004 12:53:26 -0000 Subject: The length of the Pensieve Scene In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118191 Hickengruendler wrote: > There is another scene that confirms the memory. When Harry told > Sirius and Remus about the incident, they didn't deny it. They didn't > say: "Well, the Pensieve is not objective. Snape started the fight." > They didn't even protested when Harry blamed them for bullying Snape > just because they were bored. Don't you think they would have said > something, if the situation weren't the way it seemed? If not for > their own sake, than surely for James'. I'm sure they don't want > Harry to believe such things about his father, if James never did > them. But instead they only said that James grew out of it, and that > Snape wasn't an innocent angel either. Which I'm sure is the truth, > but Sirius and Remus didn't do anything to correct Harry's view about > James deeds in this scene. > Potioncat: You know, every now and then I forget this is a work of fiction! But your post reminded me and I realized something. JKR made sure we knew Snape was the innocent victim (this time.) She sent Harry to find an explanation for the scene and the explanation provided no comfort at all. From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Fri Nov 19 13:22:59 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2004 13:22:59 -0000 Subject: Harry mastering his emotions in HPB (was: Plot in OotP) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118192 SSSusan wrote: > > This is one of the reasons I've proposed before [and taken some > > grief for doing so, I might add :-)] that Harry will manage to > > find a way to work w/ Snape, even if Snape keeps on being a > > prick. I think JKR will show us a Harry who comes to be ready to > > really focus on ending VoldyWarII. He may resist for awhile, he > > may be too upset for awhile, but I think he'll come 'round, and I > > think a part of that will mean his KNOWING he'll have to work w/ > > everyone in the Order, no matter his personal feelings and his > > belief that he's despised by at least one of them. Lupinlore: > Oh dear. Well, I suppose that's one way to solve it, but IMO would > be a very unsatisfactory way indeed. A thread like Snape's cries > out for resolution, and I just can't see any way for that to happen > unless Snape either 1) changes, or 2) dies. > > Granted that this is Harry's story, as I have pointed out myself. > Still, having Severus be nothing more than an unchanging obstacle, > a lesson in working with difficult people, would IMO be a huge cop > out on JKR's part. Worse, turning Harry into a turn-the-other > cheek martyr, especially if there is also an emphasis on how both > Harry and Voldy came from similar childhoods but made different > choices, would risk turning the whole story into a moral allegory > approaching some of C.S. Lewis' work. Now, I have nothing against > moral allegory per se, and since Lewis was up front about being a > Christian Apologist I expect it from him, but that kind of turn > just doesn't seem, IMO, to be very, well, inspired when it comes > the HP series. > > I grant you all of this is *a* way to bring these issues to a head > and a close. But if JKR goes this route it would strike me as -- > and I know this is a strong word but it really does describe how I > would feel -- insipid. SSSusan: [Breathing deeply -- Lupinlore said *it* would be insipid, not that *you* are insipid....] I've followed the remainer of this thread since I posted yesterday, and I really, REALLY don't want to go back to the area of whether Harry SHOULD have to do this nor of whether Snape SHOULD change. Of *course* the answer to the first is "No" and the second is "Yes" [imo ]. But as posters have pointed out ad nauseum, Snape is unlikely to do much changing. He gave us a hint that he might've been willing to change a wee bit at the start of Occlumency, but by the time Harry stuck his overlarge nose into Snape's penseive, that went rather out the window. So, unless something extraordinary is coming upon us, I don't imagine Snape will be willing to do much changing. THUS [i.e., consequentially, as a direct result of this], I do think Harry will have to figure out what to do about that. If he will be required to interact much with Snape in the next two years, then I think he'll choose the "adult," "mature," "noble," "responsible," even [gasp] "martyr-esque" [choose your fav or least fav term] tack of saying, either literally or figuratively to Snape, "Yeah, whatever. You go off on that, but I've got work to do." I personally am quite open to the two possibilities you've suggested of Snape either changing or dying, btw, but what I'm arguing is the big IF: IF Snape lives, IF Snape is totally unwilling and uninterested in changing his actions & attitudes, then I think Harry's putting the greater good ahead of his own sense of personal justice is what he would do. Lupinlore, since you'd like to have the Snape thread achieve resolution, can you paint a picture of how JKR might do such a thing [particularly the "change" option] and make it believable for a Snape who's shown so little interest or inclination in change? Siriusly Snapey Susan From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Fri Nov 19 13:37:02 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2004 13:37:02 -0000 Subject: SNAPE the coward? In-Reply-To: <20041118234702.49704.qmail@web53101.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118193 chrusotoxos wrote: > > I've heard that some guys are sure that Snape was in > > the circle that night, and at one moment I was almost > > convinced...but there's still the fact, that, back in > > the hospital wing, Snape flinched when he heard that > > Malfoy was there...why would he? I mean, if he was > > there too, he must have known that Malfoy was there, > > because Voldemort called him by name. So my reasoning > > is that he could not have been there - Juli now: > Let's remember that you CAN'T dispparate from > Hogwarts, Voldemort must know Snape is in Hogwarts and > since he studied there he must know the no-apparate > law, or LV placed Snape in Hogwarts as a spy, maybe > someday we'll find out. > > Right after talking to Fudge on GoF, Dumbledore > assigns tasks: he asks Hagrid and Mme Maxime to his > office (to send them after the giants), Bill went to > let Arthur know about what happened, Sirius went to get > the old OoP members (Remus, Moody, Mrs Figg), and > Snape already knew what he had to do, and he actually > seemed scared about it, so I guess he went to find LV > and say what they all did "how great to see you back > sir" and started his work for the OoP undercover with > the DEs. He must have told LV "Sorry sir, you know I > was at Hogwarts and I couldn't dispparate, and DD was > there and I didn't want him to suspect, so here I am, > a little late but still your most loyal servant." SSSusan: I think this scenario is a possibility, Juli--that Voldy might have been aware of the no-apparition rule and/or the impossibility of getting away from Hogwarts w/o its being obvious to DD. OTOH, I also think it's possible that Snape could have gotten there. Much is made of "You can't apparate on Hogwarts grounds," but how far is it to the Hogwarts gates? What would it take--5 or 10 mins.?--to step outside the grounds and apparate? Siriusly Snapey Susan, who can't wait to find out what Snape *did* do that night DD sent him off. From annemehr at yahoo.com Fri Nov 19 14:17:49 2004 From: annemehr at yahoo.com (annemehr) Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2004 14:17:49 -0000 Subject: DD as a grownup (was: Re: Plot in OotP) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118194 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "lupinlore" wrote: > Therefore, it seems counter to her statements to postulate that > Dumbledore does this or that "for the sake of the war effort." She > seems to believe he acts for the interest of the person involved. > Thus she seems to want us to take at face value that he placed Harry > at the Dursleys because he was trying to keep *Harry* alive, and that > he had Sirius stay at Grimmauld Place because he was trying to keep > *Sirius* alive. Annemehr: Yes, it does seem that Dumbledore put them in those places to keep them alive, but that doesn't mean he doesn't also do things for the sake of the war effort. Remember how Dumbledore described his mistake: "I cared more for your happiness than your knowing the truth, more for your peace of mind than my plan, more for your life than the lives that might be lost if the plan failed." - OoP ch. 37 So it seems (to paraphrase Spock) that to him, the lives of the many outweigh the lives of the few, or the one. So far, we don't even know whether Dumbledore has guarded Harry's life only to sacrifice it, or to allow Harry to sacrifice it, defeating Voldemort. Other than that, I completely agree with your post. Annemehr From willsonkmom at msn.com Fri Nov 19 14:23:16 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2004 14:23:16 -0000 Subject: Ron and the Centaurs (WAS: Plot in OotP) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118195 > Alla: > > Hmmm. Do you think when Ron meets other centaurs, some interesting > plot revelations will follow? With centaurs being much more adept in > the reading of what future holds, will they tell us what in store > for Ron? > > On the other hand, Firenze did not say anything when he met Ron. Is > it somehow connected with the possibility of Ron being a Seer? Maybe > he will predict something important for Centaurs. > > Is it possible that Ron's abilities will manifest itself only aafter > brain attack, as it was speculated earlier? Potioncat: I think there will be some connection to Ron and Divination. The Weasley family seems to be tied to foresight. Ron makes all sorts of funny statements that come true. The twins told him he had to wrestle a troll as part of the sorting ceremony (he did eventually) Percy said something along the line of "It's never too soon to think about your future. You should take divination." (I missed that the first few times and caught it the last time.) So I think something will come of Ron and Centaurs as it ties to divination. From annemehr at yahoo.com Fri Nov 19 14:24:38 2004 From: annemehr at yahoo.com (annemehr) Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2004 14:24:38 -0000 Subject: Canon times two In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118196 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Janet Anderson" wrote: > >And don't forget the trophy that shows only the letters -HA....(to the > >left of Percy's trohpy). I have speculated that perhaps these people > >could be the one's who will be dead by the end of book 7. Janet Anderson: > Since the ones we can see are mostly either dead or permanently damaged > (Frank Longbottom), you may be right. There is one Weasley, but we can't see > the first name. And I don't think the HA stands for Hagrid, because the > trophies all have first and last names, and the letters are in the position > where a first name would be, and Hagrid's first name is RUBEUS. Annemehr: Well, the Special Award to Harry is already canon: he and Ron received them at the end of CoS. The Weasley one is Percy's. You can see it when you open and close the scroll in front of it. From stevejjen at earthlink.net Fri Nov 19 14:28:35 2004 From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese) Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2004 14:28:35 -0000 Subject: Harry mastering his emotions in HPB (was: Plot in OotP) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118197 > Lupinlore: > > Oh dear. Well, I suppose that's one way to solve it, but IMO would be a very unsatisfactory way indeed. A thread like Snape's cries out for resolution, and I just can't see any way for that to happen unless Snape either 1) changes, or 2) dies. SSSusan: > I personally am quite open to the two possibilities you've suggested > of Snape either changing or dying, btw, but what I'm arguing is the > big IF: IF Snape lives, IF Snape is totally unwilling and > uninterested in changing his actions & attitudes, then I think > Harry's putting the greater good ahead of his own sense of personal > justice is what he would do. > > Lupinlore, since you'd like to have the Snape thread achieve > resolution, can you paint a picture of how JKR might do such a thing > [particularly the "change" option] and make it believable for a Snape > who's shown so little interest or inclination in change? Jen: You've pointed out the problem with a Snape changing scenario-- it would have to be believable. Everyone has a different threshold for what they can stomach of course, but I personally can't imagine Snape making a dramatic change or having some emotional catharsis (ugh). So that leaves subtle change. Subtle change is a possibility. Personally, I'd like to see a continuation of the stalemate between the two, with perhaps a minimal de-icing as each learns more about the past. Harry might learn that Snape switched sides prior to GH and actually attempted to save the Potters or something to that effect, and he would feel a slight (very slight) grudging respect for Snape. Snape might come to understand Harry's past shaped him into a very different person from James, and that one characteristic Harry *does* share with James, a strong desire to vanquish Voldemort, is actually commendable. That might be an 'ugh' scenario as well, actually. I like them feuding! I know, I know it's not very satisfying in a fictional story but it's so true to life!! Sometimes the best solution to a problematic relationship in RL is to sever ties (hehe), and this might be true in Potterverse as well. But I do think Snape and Harry, unlike Snape and Sirius, will find some way to *work* together even if the nastiness continues on both sides. And Harry is only getting older and more confident--Snape better watch out. Jen Reese, glad to be back after a Yahoogroups break ;) From willsonkmom at msn.com Fri Nov 19 14:52:16 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2004 14:52:16 -0000 Subject: snipping guidelines was Re: Occlumency: Relax or resist? ( In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118198 > Carol wrote: > Carol, politely asking posters not to snip the whole argument they're > responding to because the original argument gets lost that way. At the > very least, quote the point you're responding to! (Talking to the > group in general, not to Nora and Alla in particular.) Potioncat(also talking to the group): I've been frustrated at times when a person snipped too much of the post they were responding to and it became hard to follow the point. And I've been frustrated on a dial-up connection for a poorly snipped post to take forever to load, particularly if the responding portion was short. And I try to snip just the right amount myself, not always sure I did a good job. It wouldn't be a bad idea for all of us to go back and review the rules. Here's my attempt at a link: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/files/Admin_Files/Posting _Basics.html OK, everyone, click on the link and take a look. I'll be right there. Potioncat (becoming more like Molly everyday.) From hickengruendler at yahoo.de Fri Nov 19 14:56:03 2004 From: hickengruendler at yahoo.de (hickengruendler) Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2004 14:56:03 -0000 Subject: Snape the rabbit (was: Re: The length of the Pensieve Scene) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118199 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "potioncat" wrote: > > Another thought I had was that in the Pensieve scene, the marauders > are described in animal-like ways. Just happens to be the very > animals they turn into. So I wondered if Snape was being described > that way too, although I never came up with anything I could write > up for the list. Hickengruendler: I haven't got the book with me, therefore I can't check. But wasn't Sirius described as a dog who smelled a rabbit, when he saw Snape? Of course Sirius' connections to dogs is obvious, but in this scene, the rabbit is obviously Severus. The problem is of course, characterwise it doesn't fit at all. Snape is clearly no fluffy bunny (or rabbit), and the young Snape probably wasn't either, seeing how many dark spells he knew. And normally, older Snape is compared to a bat, which, from his appereance and behaviour, seems to fit a lot better. From willsonkmom at msn.com Fri Nov 19 15:08:45 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2004 15:08:45 -0000 Subject: snipping guidelines was Re: Occlumency: Relax or resist? ( In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118200 Potioncat: snipping portion of comments > It wouldn't be a bad idea for all of us to go back and review the > rules. Here's my attempt at a link:> > snipping Potioncat: Never mind. It doesn't work. Try this instead. click "home" on the side bar to your left click on "posting guidelines" in the welcoming paragraph scroll down to 2.4.2 From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com Fri Nov 19 15:22:44 2004 From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (Barry Arrowsmith) Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2004 15:22:44 +0000 Subject: Unfortunate!Peter Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118201 I'm often accused of thinking the worst of everybody in the books. Well, at least that way I never feel let down when somebody 'trustworthy' does the dirty. But just for a change I'm changing my viewpoint. It's to fulfill a sort of promise I made a few days ago. I'm arguing that somebody almost universally accepted as being ESE is on the side of the angels. Trouble is, I think this'll be as unpopular as my character assassinations. You just can't win.... Not a popular lad, is Peter. Not with the characters in the books and not with the fans. Most of both groups are of the opinion that he should be veiled, ringing a hand-bell and crying "Unclean, unclean..." as he stumbles down the road to perdition. Maybe so, but it's always worthwhile to have a sniff around some of the more obvious characterisations, just in case there's something tucked away behind the facade. And anyway, I enjoy ferreting out motives, why so-and-so ended up like he has, what drives him. It's Peter's turn. A major problem is that there's so little in canon that is objective and untainted by the opinions or prejudices of others. Still, we'll see what we can do with what we have. The earliest images we have of him are in the Pensieve memory. It is not a comfortable picture. Although generally classed as one of the Marauders, he's obviously the odd one out. To James he's an appreciative audience, ready to admire and perhaps hero worship whenever James feels like putting on a performance. To Sirius he's a nothing, a hanger-on to be belittled; to Lupin - what? We don't really know, Lupin acts as if he wasn't there. So why did they spend so much time and trouble encouraging him to master the Animagus spell? Why did they tolerate him, what did they need him for? "Ah," some will say "it's because as a rat he could immobilise the Whomping Willow, that's why." "Oh, yes," says I "and how did they know he'd be a rat?" Because they couldn't know, not in advance. Besides, I'm not so sure that the tree was all that massive then and even in PoA Harry et al manage quite nicely with a broken branch. Peter was not essential, yet they persisted for years. Why? Next in the timeline (or previously - we're not sure when it happened) is a non-appearance. There's no sign of Peter in the so-called Prank. Was he an observer or was he absent? Absent, probably. I can't see someone as supposedly timid as Peter not doing the brown-trouser trick when Sirius sent Snape off to Lupin's lair. Though on second thoughts, there is a place for him in that episode. Who told DD? I doubt Sevvy was calm and collected enough to gather his robes around him, stalk off to his House-master and request an interview with the Dumbledore about a hidden werewolf. He'd be ready to shout it from the roof-tops, tell anyone who'd listen - but he didn't. I'd think that only the timely arrival of someone like DD would prevent that. So, it's either his much-vaunted omniscience (which seems very patchy at other times, you must admit) or somebody told him. Could very well have been Peter. If so, then maybe we have a role for Peter. James and Sirius - tear-aways; Lupin - made a prefect to try and keep them in check (unsuccessfully); Peter - informer; he tells DD just what they're up to. You don't really believe DD didn't know about them being animagi, do you? Perhaps Peter is getting some basic training in spying. Then there's Moody's photograph. There's Peter, sitting between James and Lily. Lots of fans have wondered about this; is it significant? Was there unrequited affection (or even requited affection) between James/Peter or between Lily/Peter? Why are James and Lily sitting apart? Not being romantically inclined I've never read much into it, but believe you me, others have. And so to Godric's Hollow, the key to the entire HP saga IMO. We know what we've been told by Sirius, we know what most, or some of the characters believe. Peter passed info to Voldy for a year, was made SK, betrayed the Potters, was cornered by Sirius, killed thirteen Muggles, turned into Scabbers and escaped down a drain. All very convenient. All very logical. For some. Me, I think it's much more interesting than the bare bones suggest and I've lost count of the number of posts written on the subject, so I'll not go into the details again. There's just a couple of points I want to consider on the GH episode: 1. I think there's a hole in the SK set-up. Remember in OoP Harry is given the GP address (presumably written by DD) - it is not addressed to him and once he has read it, Moody burns it. This leaves one with the impression that *anyone* reading that slip of paper could find No.12 GP. This makes tying down who knew what and when about GH much more iffy. For a start, it'd wouldn't be necessary to have a meeting to pass on the address, nor would the SK know if an address slip hadn't been burned but had been passed on to someone who was not a friend of the Potters. 2. Scabbers vanishes into the sewers. Right. Then what? Where does he go? Who does he see? Want a suggestion? OK - Dumbledore. Neither the DEs nor the MoM people believe he's alive. Who's left? DD. It's maybe my memory, but unlike just about all the adults in the books I can't remember DD ever saying or hinting or commenting in PoA that he believed Peter was dead. If I'm wrong I'm sure someone will correct me. One of the FAQs that crops up regularly is Scabbers' association with the Weasleys. How long has he been there, along with musing on how a long-lived non-magical rat was accepted as a pet at Hogwarts for years and no-one so much as blinked. What was Peter likely to know about the Weasleys? Damn all, I should think. Neither Molly nor Arthur appear on Moody's photograph and so probably weren't in the Order in the first Voldy War, and they were at school years before him and their kids were years after him. Then there's the general acceptance of Peter spending 12 years as a rat and never, so far as we can tell, having a tea-break and stretching his legs. Add to this the fact that at the Shrieking Shack it took two wizards wielding two wands simultaneously to switch him back to human form and I begin to suspect that Peter has been spelled. He might not even be in animagus form at all, he could have been transfigured. And who's the Transfiguration Supremo? DD. Would being transfigured count as being chained? There's not much evidence (before SS) that Scabbers shows any sign of human intelligence - except perhaps once, when he bites Goyle. That is interesting in itself - why would a Voldy supporter go out of his way to attack a Slytherin? But to all intents and purposes he acts just as a rat should. If he was in animagus form I'd have thought Crookshannks would have forced him out of it. Being chewed up as moggy appetiser is just as bad and much more immediate than being chased by DEs. Another oddity; when Scabbers runs away (when Ron thinks Crookshanks has eaten him), where does he hide? Hagrid's Hut. Hagrid has given me pause to wonder over the years. I've never been quite sure how deep in DD's confidence he is. Just how much does he know, just how many little errands has he run for DD? This is the wizard who states "..nobody went bad 'cept they was Slytherin" yet rubbishes Black (a Gryffindor) for betraying James and Lily. Does not compute. Now if Harry could corner Hagrid and start asking some pointed questions we might get to the bottom of this. No, I think DD placed Scabbers with the Weasleys. It was a large enough family that sooner or later Scabbers would turn up at Hogwarts while Harry was there. And Harry is important, both to DD and to Peter. A few weeks ago I complained that the description of Peter's escape after the SS debacle had been cut short. we're told he ran away - but not the direction. The natural assumption is that it'd be towards the Forest. But it'd be a turn up for the books if he hadn't, if he'd run towards the school instead. I'm sure DD would have been fascinated by what he could tell him. Peter is supposed to be weak, pathetic, ineffectual. Now compare him to the big, brave DEs. They cower before Voldy. Peter disagrees with him, tries to get him to change his mind about using Harry Potter for his scheme while they're at the Riddle House. I think Peter works for DD - and probably has for a long time. A few days ago I wrote pointing out that Peter had never been 'chained', that he could leave at any time. I also hinted that there might be an alternative explanation. Ready? I think Peter is/has been paying penance, with the encouragement of DD, for some act of foolishness, naivety or stupidity that contributed to the deaths of the Potters. He's DD's eyes and ears in the Voldy camp and maybe the final safety net if Harry gets into a really sticky spot. Forget all this 'life debt' guff (a phrase invented by fans incidentally and not in canon). Peter will eventually help Harry and/or turn on Voldy for reasons that have little to do with the Shrieking Shack episode. He may already have done so. Remember the graveyard, the bit where Harry escapes? Do you really think that one unaimed Impedimenta! spell thrown over his shoulder could have discommoded that many DEs, spread in a circle, all at once? "Ah," you'll say, "but he killed Cedric. He must be ESE" Did he? Read the passage again. The cloaked figure (Peter) is carrying something in his arms (plural). It's only after Cedric has been killed that he puts down the bundle (Voldy) and lights his wand. And he's scared, trembling so much he can hardly tie knots in a rope. It's been proposed in the past that there was someone else in that graveyard - the most common suspects being Sirius, Lupin or Bagman. What is sure is that the passage does not say that the AK came from Peter. You'll all disagree, of course. Goody. Can't have outbreaks of unanimity spoiling the fun. As a final indicator there's his name, and we all appreciate how JKR likes fitting names to characters. Pettigrew - small of stature, nothing special there; but Peter - the rock, that's something else. Kneasy From Vivamus at TaprootTech.com Fri Nov 19 09:50:48 2004 From: Vivamus at TaprootTech.com (Vivamus) Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2004 04:50:48 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: SNAPE the coward? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200411190451221.SM01320@DEVBOX> No: HPFGUIDX 118202 > Chrusotoxos: > I've heard that some guys are sure that Snape was in the > circle that night, > and at one moment I was almost convinced...but there's still > the fact, that, back in the hospital wing, Snape flinched > when he heard that Malfoy was there...why would he? I mean, > if he was there too, he must have known that Malfoy was > there, because Voldemort called him by name. Vivamus: He might well have flinched because he WAS there, and Harry was starting to name names. Malfoy's was the first name Harry gave, and THAT was when "Snape made a sudden movement, but as Harry looked at him, Snape's eyes flew back to Fudge." Who wouldn't be alarmed? But, he could also have done that if he was loyal, and knew FUDGE was a DE, and didn't want Harry putting himself in danger from the MoM (as it later turned out he was, but from Umbridge, who we had not met yet in GoF.) And, he could have flinched because he was in the graveyard as an UNDERCOVER DE, loyal to DD. (I don't actually buy this theory, since DD had publicly stated that Snape had been spying for our side against the DEs, and LV is no fool.) > Chrusotoxos: > Also, I can't think that Voldemort wouldn't have talked to > him if he was > there. A guy spying at Hogwarts, how cool is that? And to > show Harry that > even his teachers wanted him dead... Vivamus: How about the eagle owl? "An eagle owl flew through the coil of smoke rising from Hagrids chimney; it soared toward the castle, around the Owlry, and out of sight." -- that's from OOtP shortly before Harry and Viktor run into Barty Crouch, Sr. Even on the first read, I thought that sentence jumped out as being a bit of planted evidence, referring to Draco's Eagle owl. Then, not long after the encounter with Crouch, Sr., Harry has his vision in Trelawney's class: He was riding on the back of an eagle owl, . . . Harry had left the owl's back . . . he was watching, now, as it fluttered across the room, into a chair with its back to him "You are in luck, Wormtail," said a cold, high-pitched voice from the depths of the chair in which the owl had landed. "You are very fortunate indeed. Your blunder has not ruined everything. He is dead." So, an eagle owl bore the message to LV that Crouch had been killed. The message would have to have come from Hogwarts, and Draco has the only eagle owl mentioned in the series thus far, so it *probably* was his. I take the earlier bit with the eagle owl as a hint that spying had been going on for LV at Hogwarts for some time, with Draco's owl being the medium. We know from the veritaserum that Barty Jr. killed Barty Sr. Snape knew about the encounter between Harry and Crouch Sr., but would not have known that Crouch was dead, unless Crouch!Moody told him. Apparently, someone used Draco's owl to tell LV that Crouch was dead. Crouch!Moody was the only one we KNOW knew, but Moody being chummy with Draco Malfoy in ANY way would have been highly suspicious. For Snape, it would have been easy. OTOH, Crouch!Moody might have just gone to the school owlry in the early morning when no one was there, and sent it with Draco's owl. So, ASSUMING it was Draco's owl, then we have two scenarios: (1) Crouch!Moody sent the owl by himself, or (2) he told Snape, who sent the owl. (I'm dismissing that they would have included a foolish and boastful blabbermouth like Draco in something so important.) I'm inclined to think Snape is loyal to DD, for the simple reason that characters keep questioning it. OTOH, it could be the final straw that teaches Harry that DD is in fact a fallible human being, when he has trusted Severus all these years, against all recommendations and warnings, and been wrong. Vivamus From bob.oliver at cox.net Fri Nov 19 11:55:33 2004 From: bob.oliver at cox.net (lupinlore) Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2004 11:55:33 -0000 Subject: Harry left at the Dursleys (Was Re: Plot in OotP) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118203 Carol: > Harry had to be hidden, and the blood protection made possible by Lily's sacrifice (not to be confused with any charm Lily herself may have put on him before GH) was his best, if not his only, chance for survival. Okay, I can go with this. > Yes, Harry's survival was the best, the chief, the wholly sufficient > reason for placing him with the Dursleys. > And everything he has undergone so far, from the cupboard at the > Dursleys to Occlumency with Snape to the dragon in the TWT will help > him to prepare for that ordeal. Had he been indulged like Draco (by > his mother), he would be overconfident and far less prepared than he > is even now. And it will get worse before it gets better, if it gets > better at all. We have JKR's word for that. Well, okay. I can go with this on the premise that "Dumbledore has no choice in these matters and makes the best of a terrible situation by saying that Harry is learning some skills he needs." What I CAN'T go with, and what I think Alla rejects as well, is the idea that Dumbledore deliberately allows the abuse for the purpose of "toughening Harry," etc. I think that even in the situation with Snape there is a large element of "no choice." It would be better if there were somebody else to teach Harry potions, but there isn't so Dumbledore reluctantly has to make the best of a very bad situation. And he has told us that it wasn't because of any quality of Snape's (other than his Occlumency skills) that he chose the Potionsmaster to teach Harry Occlumency, but because he thought it would harm Harry if he (Dumbledore) did it. Otherwise I think we slide into an "ends justify the means" argument, which is slippery at best and downright pernicious at worst. And I really don't think that is where JKR is trying to go. Lupinlore From jlv230 at yahoo.co.uk Fri Nov 19 14:19:10 2004 From: jlv230 at yahoo.co.uk (jlv230) Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2004 14:19:10 -0000 Subject: Patroni and Prongs Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118204 I am still fairly new to this group so I'm not sure if this has been discussed before (I did try searching, but might have missed something!) so here goes: I was just wondering if anyone had any thoughts on what Patroni can do apart from ward off dementors. I ask because, in one scene, Dumbledore sends off a silvery bird from his wand with a message. Also, as it is a fairly big deal that Harry can conjure up a corporeal patronus, and the patronus represents James and happy emotions that Voldemort does not understand (powers the Dark Lord knows not??), I was wondering if JKR was hinting that Harry's patronus will play a major role in the forthcoming books - perhaps in the final showdown with Voldemort that (I believe) most of us expect. What do you think? Or do you think I'm reading too much into Dumbledore's action which was so fleetingly described? All the best, JLV From Snarryfan at aol.com Fri Nov 19 15:47:11 2004 From: Snarryfan at aol.com (evita2fr) Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2004 15:47:11 -0000 Subject: Snape the rabbit (was: Re: The length of the Pensieve Scene) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118205 potioncat wrote: > > Another thought I had was that in the Pensieve scene, the > > marauders are described in animal-like ways. Just happens > > to be the very animals they turn into. So I wondered if > > Snape was being described that way too, > > Hickengruendler: > But wasn't Sirius described as a dog who smelled a rabbit, > when he saw Snape? Of course Sirius' connections to dogs is > obvious, but in this scene, the rabbit is obviously Severus. > The problem is of course, characterwise it doesn't fit at all. > Snape is clearly no fluffy bunny (or rabbit), and the young > Snape probably wasn't either, seeing how many dark spells he > knew. And normally, older Snape is compared to a bat, which, > from his appearance and behaviour, seems to fit a lot better. I won't say it I won't say it I won't say..."Bunnies bunnies bunnies, it must be bunnies! or maybe midget." Sorry. Anyway, the dog who smelled a rabbit makes me more think to a predator spotting his prey. It's reinforce Snape's role as a victim (for this time). And for the bat, I found a site with rather accurate description of a character and "animal's totem" related of a name. It's in french, but if someone want the link. With Severin, you found the base, Severus. It says that the animal (linked to this name) is the bat. I'd said more, but it's probably for OTChatter. Christelle From nrenka at yahoo.com Fri Nov 19 18:11:26 2004 From: nrenka at yahoo.com (nrenka) Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2004 18:11:26 -0000 Subject: Unfortunate!Peter In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118206 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Barry Arrowsmith wrote: > "Ah," you'll say, "but he killed Cedric. He must be ESE" > Did he? Read the passage again. The cloaked figure (Peter) is > carrying something in his arms (plural). It's only after Cedric > has been killed that he puts down the bundle (Voldy) and lights > his wand. And he's scared, trembling so much he can hardly tie > knots in a rope. It's been proposed in the past that there was > someone else in that graveyard - the most common suspects being > Sirius, Lupin or Bagman. What is sure is that the passage does not > say that the AK came from Peter. Goodness, I think I'm on endless repeat here (see note 116568), but I really think that this should come out every time this argument gets raised: You're probably not going to take this as authoritative, Kneasy, but it's stated as fact in a JKR interview: Rorujin: Did Wormtail used Voldemort's wand to kill Cedric? Is it why Cedric comes out of Voldemort's wand even though was Wormtail who killed him? J.K. Rowling: Correct! A straightforward question, a straightforward answer, a clarification for something that she thought wasn't particularly tricky, but realizes came off as such to some readers. A link to the interview, for you skeptics: http://www.acciofirebolt.com/books/jkr/interview_04march.php There are many things that one can argue about, but I really don't think, in this case, it's worth arguing with the author about something that she's willing to answer directly as fact. It would be somewhat like trying to maintain that MWPP were all in different houses, after having that authorially nuked. Unless you're going to go Pippin's route and state that Lupin is actually Wormtail--that's the only route out of this one, the postulation of multiple Wormtails, or the dissociation of the Wormtail identity from Peter. First chapter of GoF pretty much nukes the latter, though. Just something to take into consideration in the working out of this theory. It's no fun postulating something that you've been told isn't going to work out, I generally find. -Nora runs off to do some hard-core photocopying From willsonkmom at msn.com Fri Nov 19 18:19:02 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2004 18:19:02 -0000 Subject: Unfortunate!Peter In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118207 Kneasy: > > "Ah," you'll say, "but he killed Cedric. He must be ESE" > > Did he? Read the passage again. The cloaked figure (Peter) is > > carrying something in his arms (plural). It's only after Cedric > > has been killed that he puts down the bundle (Voldy) and lights > > his wand. And he's scared, trembling so much he can hardly tie > > knots in a rope. snip Nora: > You're probably not going to take this as authoritative, Kneasy, but > it's stated as fact in a JKR interview: > > Rorujin: Did Wormtail used Voldemort's wand to kill Cedric? Is it why > Cedric comes out of Voldemort's wand even though was Wormtail who > killed him? > > J.K. Rowling: Correct! Potioncat: Maybe he wasn't shaking out of fear? Perhaps he is shaking because he had to kill Cedric to avoid blowing his cover? Because if he didn't kill Cedric he'd be dead and who would protect Harry? From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Fri Nov 19 18:26:52 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2004 18:26:52 -0000 Subject: Harry mastering his emotions in HPB (was: Plot in OotP) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118208 > Jen: You've pointed out the problem with a Snape changing scenario-- > it would have to be believable. Everyone has a different threshold > for what they can stomach of course, but I personally can't imagine > Snape making a dramatic change or having some emotional catharsis > (ugh). So that leaves subtle change. Alla: I confess - I do like emotional catharsis for Snape in fanfiction. :) The believable one, mind you. But I do realise that it is unlikely to happen in canon, so yeah, subtle change it is (I'll take what I can get) Jen: > That might be an 'ugh' scenario as well, actually. I like them > feuding! I know, I know it's not very satisfying in a fictional > story but it's so true to life!! Sometimes the best solution to a > problematic relationship in RL is to sever ties (hehe), and this > might be true in Potterverse as well. Alla: Oh, absolutely. It makes for dramatic tension and fun storytelling, but honestly, after OOP I am at the point where I had enough of the feud even if as fun storytelling. IMO, it turned very ugly, it made Snape's character look static. If I had one dissapointment in OOP, it would be the fact that their relationship did not become better (not hugging, but just mutual cooperation). I was hoping that after GoF it will happen, but on the other hand, I realise that it is too early in the series, I do. From willsonkmom at msn.com Fri Nov 19 18:37:47 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2004 18:37:47 -0000 Subject: Eagle owl wasRe: SNAPE the coward? In-Reply-To: <200411190451221.SM01320@DEVBOX> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118209 Vivamus: snipping quotes > So, an eagle owl bore the message to LV that Crouch had been killed. The > message would have to have come from Hogwarts, and Draco has the only eagle > owl mentioned in the series thus far, so it *probably* was his. I take the > earlier bit with the eagle owl as a hint that spying had been going on for > LV at Hogwarts for some time, with Draco's owl being the medium. > snip > Apparently, someone used Draco's owl to tell LV that Crouch was dead. > Crouch!Moody was the only one we KNOW knew, but Moody being chummy with > Draco Malfoy in ANY way would have been highly suspicious. For Snape, it > would have been easy. OTOH, Crouch!Moody might have just gone to the school > owlry in the early morning when no one was there, and sent it with Draco's > owl. > > So, ASSUMING it was Draco's owl, then we have two scenarios: (1) > Crouch!Moody sent the owl by himself, or (2) he told Snape, who sent the > owl. (I'm dismissing that they would have included a foolish and boastful > blabbermouth like Draco in something so important.) > > I'm inclined to think Snape is loyal to DD, for the simple reason that > characters keep questioning it. OTOH, it could be the final straw that > teaches Harry that DD is in fact a fallible human being, when he has trusted > Severus all these years, against all recommendations and warnings, and been > wrong. > Potioncat: I assumed the Eagle Owl was the Malfoy family owl. But it could be Draco's personal owl. What hits home now is that Lucius doesn't yet know that LV is back. So why is it Malfoy's owl being used at all? I would assume that just any owl wouldn't work. LV must have some sort of charm to stay hidden from the post. I think Barty JR sent the owl...regardless. There is enough in GoF to indicate that Snape didn't know about Crouch!Moody. From willsonkmom at msn.com Fri Nov 19 18:58:39 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2004 18:58:39 -0000 Subject: Harry mastering his emotions in HPB (was: Plot in OotP) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118210 > SSSusan wrote: > > > This is one of the reasons I've proposed before [and taken some > > > grief for doing so, I might add :-)] that Harry will manage to > > > find a way to work w/ Snape, even if Snape keeps on being a > > > prick. I think JKR will show us a Harry who comes to be ready to > > > really focus on ending VoldyWarII. Potioncat: I am shocked at you, SSSusan! How could you say "...if Snape keeps on being a prick...." You should have said, "...if Professor Snape keeps on being a prick..." > > Lupinlore: snip > > Granted that this is Harry's story, as I have pointed out myself. > > Still, having Severus be nothing more than an unchanging obstacle, > > a lesson in working with difficult people, would IMO be a huge cop > > out on JKR's part. Worse, turning Harry into a turn-the-other > > cheek martyr, especially if there is also an emphasis on how both > > Harry and Voldy came from similar childhoods but made different > > choices, would risk turning the whole story into a moral allegory > > approaching some of C.S. Lewis' work. snip> > > > I grant you all of this is *a* way to bring these issues to a head > > and a close. But if JKR goes this route it would strike me as -- > > and I know this is a strong word but it really does describe how I > > would feel -- insipid. > Potioncat: Snape has said Harry has to control his emotions. McGonagall has said Harry has to control his emotions. JKR has said Harry has to control his emotions. I'm getting the idea that Harry has to control his emotions. Harry found out he was a wizard and that magic is real. Problems didn't go away and he can't just wish and flick them to oblivion. He pretty much has to deal with things within a certain framework. So unless he's going to shove Professor Snape into a vanishing cabinet, he's going to have to deal with him. I don't see him using the same level of maturation as an adult, but teens have to put up with unreasonable adults all the time. It can be done with style and it doesn't have to be insipid. Of course, I'd like to see some softening (just a little) on Snape's part. > SSSusan: > [Breathing deeply -- Lupinlore said *it* would be insipid, not that > *you* are insipid....] Potioncat: And I nominate SSSusan to be the one to teach Harry how to control his emotions. From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com Fri Nov 19 19:00:06 2004 From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (arrowsmithbt) Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2004 19:00:06 -0000 Subject: Unfortunate!Peter In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118211 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "nrenka" wrote: > > Goodness, I think I'm on endless repeat here (see note 116568), but I > really think that this should come out every time this argument gets > raised: > > You're probably not going to take this as authoritative, Kneasy, but > it's stated as fact in a JKR interview: > > Rorujin: Did Wormtail used Voldemort's wand to kill Cedric? Is it why > Cedric comes out of Voldemort's wand even though was Wormtail who > killed him? > > J.K. Rowling: Correct! > > A straightforward question, a straightforward answer, a clarification > for something that she thought wasn't particularly tricky, but > realizes came off as such to some readers. > Oh, I'll argue all right. Yes, Cedric was killed with Voldy's wand. However there seem to be two wands. There's the one that kills Cedric and which Voldy finds in his robe pocket after resurrection. Then there's the wand that Peter uses to produce ropes to tie up Harry. They must be different otherwise the PI replay would show ropes - it doesn't. According to the text Voldy!Baby was big enough to need both hands for it to be manipulated correctly, not something small enough to carry in one arm while accurately aiming a wand with the other. The question asked of JKR was actually two questions: 1. Was it Voldys wand? 2. Was Peter using it? Which one was she answering 'yes' to? Or was it both? She's cocked up over wands in that graveyard before. I'll wait for textual confirmation, if you don't mind. Kneasy From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Fri Nov 19 19:08:15 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2004 19:08:15 -0000 Subject: Harry mastering his emotions in HPB (was: Plot in OotP) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118212 > > Potioncat: > Snape has said Harry has to control his emotions. > McGonagall has said Harry has to control his emotions. > JKR has said Harry has to control his emotions. > I'm getting the idea that Harry has to control his emotions. > Alla: Well, yes yes and yes, although Snape is the one to preach about controlling his emotions. :o) My question is though - did anybody tell Harry to control his "Snape related" emotions? Yeah, Dumbledore keeps telling him to call Snape "professor" , but besides that maybe there is some truth in what Harry thinks of Snape? Not that he is ESE! of course, but what kind of person he is. From willsonkmom at msn.com Fri Nov 19 19:22:30 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2004 19:22:30 -0000 Subject: Harry mastering his emotions in HPB (was: Plot in OotP) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118213 > > Alla: Yeah, Dumbledore keeps telling him to call Snape "professor" , but > besides that maybe there is some truth in what Harry thinks of Snape? > Potioncat: Oh, I think there is a lot of truth in what Harry thinks of Snape. But no one is telling him to stop thinking, just to control his emotions. McGonagall was speaking about Umbridge, and I'm sure she never expected nor wanted Harry to think nice thoughts about her! From carolynwhite2 at aol.com Fri Nov 19 19:26:10 2004 From: carolynwhite2 at aol.com (carolynwhite2) Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2004 19:26:10 -0000 Subject: Unfortunate!Peter In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118214 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "arrowsmithbt" wrote: > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "nrenka" wrote: > > > Oh, I'll argue all right. > Yes, Cedric was killed with Voldy's wand. > However there seem to be two wands. > There's the one that kills Cedric and which Voldy finds in his robe pocket after resurrection. > Then there's the wand that Peter uses to produce ropes to tie up Harry. > They must be different otherwise the PI replay would show ropes - it doesn't. > > According to the text Voldy!Baby was big enough to need both hands for it to be manipulated correctly, not something small enough to carry in one arm while accurately aiming a wand with the other. > Carolyn: And Peter's own wand would be a very small one, wouldn't it? Peter is a very small person, and wand length is related to height. Easy to tuck into a pocket. From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Fri Nov 19 19:39:18 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2004 19:39:18 -0000 Subject: Harry mastering his emotions in HPB (was: Plot in OotP) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118215 SSSusan wrote: > > This is one of the reasons I've proposed before [and taken > > some grief for doing so, I might add :-)] that Harry will manage > > to find a way to work w/ Snape, even if Snape keeps on being a > > prick. I think JKR will show us a Harry who comes to be ready > > to really focus on ending VoldyWarII. Potioncat: > I am shocked at you, SSSusan! How could you say "...if Snape keeps > on being a prick...." You should have said, "...if Professor Snape > keeps on being a prick..." SSSusan again: HAHAHAHA! Good one, 'cat!! ;-) Lupinlore: > snip > > Still, having Severus be nothing more than an unchanging > > obstacle, a lesson in working with difficult people, would IMO be > > a huge cop out on JKR's part. Worse, turning Harry into a turn- > > the-other cheek martyr, especially if there is also an emphasis > > on how both Harry and Voldy came from similar childhoods but made > > different choices, would risk turning the whole story into a > > moral allegory approaching some of C.S. Lewis' work. > snip> > > > I grant you all of this is *a* way to bring these issues to a > > head and a close. But if JKR goes this route it would strike me > > as -- and I know this is a strong word but it really does > > describe how I would feel -- insipid. Potioncat: > Snape has said Harry has to control his emotions. > McGonagall has said Harry has to control his emotions. > JKR has said Harry has to control his emotions. > I'm getting the idea that Harry has to control his emotions. > So unless he's going to shove Professor Snape into a vanishing > cabinet, he's going to have to deal with him. I don't see him using > the same level of maturation as an adult, but teens have to put up > with unreasonable adults all the time. It can be done with style > and it doesn't have to be insipid. SSSusan: Yup. I think we're getting that message about controlling emotions loud & clear...and so I think we're going to see it in HBP, even if not right away. We don't know if there'll be an Umbridge-type character or an encounter with Voldy or just what it is which will require him to control those emotions; we don't even know whether Harry will continue to have class w/ Snape since we don't know his Potions OWL result yet. So it *may* be that controlling his emotions will involve Snape, or it may be that it won't. JKR could have meant this in context of Harry's just really learning to focus on learning, strategizing, being able to defend himself... in essence, on preparing himself for Voldy. So the conflict between him & Snape could continue to be a kind of sidelight *or* it could, for some reason, take center stage. If it **matters** towards his being able to defeat Voldy, though, I'm still banking on Harry managing to change. And *hoping* for at least small, grudging change on Snape's part, though not counting on it. SSSusan: > > [Breathing deeply -- Lupinlore said *it* would be insipid, not > > that *you* are insipid....] Potioncat: > And I nominate SSSusan to be the one to teach Harry how to control > his emotions. SSSusan again: Uh...not a good idea. I can be a real hothead. BUT I think I would've done a damn sight better on Occlumency lessons w/ Harry than *Professor* Prick. ;-) Siriusly Snapey Susan, who, after viewing photos of the PoA launch party in London, wants to take some scissors to some of these young men's hair! [Check it out: http://news.bbc.co.uk/cbbcnews/hi/newsid_4020000/newsid_4024300/402435 1.stm ; http://news.bbc.co.uk/cbbcnews/hi/newsid_4020000/newsid_4024300/402435 1.stm ; http://www.hpana.com/imageviewer.cfm?nid=18404&f=dan- alfonso.jpg ] From manawydan at ntlworld.com Fri Nov 19 19:42:00 2004 From: manawydan at ntlworld.com (manawydan) Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2004 19:42:00 -0000 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Muggleborns choosing WW References: <1100825308.5137.98865.m21@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <000601c4ce6f$d82f80a0$704b6d51@f3b7j4> No: HPFGUIDX 118216 kjirstem wrote@ > I think there are other things to consider about an individual's > contribution to society in the WW or the Muggle world. Because of the > International Statute of Wizarding Secrecy, magic cannot be used to > solve problems in the Muggle world. Since magic is what wizards are > trained in, and since more mundane knowledge is not cultivated after > age 11, their skills are not of use to the rest of the world. To me, > this seems to limit the scope of what a wizard or witch can > accomplish. There are a lot more Muggles than people in the WW, > regardless of the calculation method used for the WW population. So, > a person with talents that are fundamentally non-magical might be able > to do a lot more good in the Muggle world. Though logically, given that there are more Muggles, there are equally, more talented Muggles to make the contribution. "Mundane knowledge" of course is really a concept that's from our point of view rather than the WW point of view. For them, what we would consider esoteric (the techniques of magic and so on) would be entirely mundane (this is the spell that you use to wash the dishes, this is the one that you use to send a minute to Araminta in the Wages Department, and so on) while what we would consider mundane (our technology, the "laws of physics", and so on) appear to be entirely esoteric in the WW (as witness the "eccentric" Arthur Weasley always mucking about with Muggle stuff - I think JRK is pretty explicit in pointing us towards drawing that comparison). Also, would a Muggleborn wizard necessarily have any feeling of responsibility to the world they were born in, as opposed to being entirely sucked into WW culture? The only example we've seen is Tom Riddle, who went back solely to get his revenge on his father and who treats Muggles as lower than vermin. > The interesting thing, I think, is that the breach between the Muggle > and magic worlds doesn't seem to be in the WW's best interests. (At > least now, maybe it was in 1692.) The WW is probably somewhat > dependent on the Muggle world for food, and manfactured goods. I > suspect the WW would be affected by dramatic changes in the Muggle > world, such as war or widespread disease. Yet, the WW has little > effect on the Muggle world due to the Statute of Secrecy. I'd tend to take the opposite view and think that the WW is far too small and culturally fragile to survive coming into the open on any sort of level of equality: if they did, they'd be ruthlessly exploited, robbed, and brutalised, the way pretty much _all_ cultures have been treated by Western civilisation. Given that the WW can hide in plain view - "don't notice me" - I don't think that the kind of cataclysms that have affected Muggledom have touched the WW more than in passing. If any of the wizards have noticed, they've probably shrugged and said "look what the Muggles are doing to each other now, I'm so glad we're not like them". But I do think you're right in the modern context. Could the wizard population of Hiroshima have survived being at ground zero? Possibly not, especially without warning. Will the WW be able to hide from the effects of global warming or the incessant pressure on space. Once again, possibly not (though the climate at Hogwarts does appear to behave as it traditionally "should"). A daring thought: can the WW survive _without_ the victory of Voldemort or some other Dark Wizard who seeks to reduce Muggledom to slavery? Not a _nice_ thought, but... > The WW comes across as conservative and changing very little over time > (e.g. robes, forms of address at school, ghost Binns teaching > history). I doubt there is much innovation in the use of magic; the > teaching methods appear to emphasize rote memorization. Fred and > George are a break from this, they actually invent things. But > generally, there is a recipe presented to the students and they > learn the recipe rather than the reasons. In addition, with fewer > people there are fewer ideas to try, therefore change occurs at a > slower pace. On the other hand, since the break between the worlds > there have been substantial changes in what the Muggle world can > accomplish. Eventually the Muggle world will catch up to or surpass > the WW in many ways; communication is already better in the Muggle > world than in the WW. The books do give us some examples of innovation, not just Fred and George, so that I think there is both internally generated development (new potions and the like) and also externally generated development (the Knight Bus, for example). But I also think that some of the things that you highlight reflect a basic cultural difference between the two worlds - perhaps inherent in the difference between a magical and a technological world. But JKR alone knows all Cheers Ffred O Benryn wleth hyd Luch Reon Cymru yn unfryd gerhyd Wrion Gwret dy Cymry yghymeiri From quigonginger at yahoo.com Fri Nov 19 19:46:12 2004 From: quigonginger at yahoo.com (quigonginger) Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2004 19:46:12 -0000 Subject: Harry left at the Dursleys (Was Re: Plot in OotP) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118217 > Del : (really big snip) > DD did not HAVE to leave the Dursleys completely unsupervised for 10 > years. Unless of course that was part of the stinking contract. Ginger: I've been watching this thread closely, and I think you may be on to something. What did DD know about the Dursleys? Petunia hates (or at least is envious of) Lily. Petunia and Vernon spoil Dudley. They have a house that is large enough for a family of 4 and the income to support 4 people. (Not ruling out that they may have been compensated.) They go out of their way to appear respectable. Petunia wants no wizard contact ruining her respectable little world. So he has to leave Harry there. Blood and all that. He'll be dead elsewhere. He doesn't know for a fact that Petunia will project her ill feelings of Lily and the WW in general on Harry. He knows that they are capable of loving and providing for a child, even if they spoil him. I'm sure DD had no illusions that they would spoil Harry, but knowing that they liked looking respectable, he would have every reason to assume that they would keep up appearances. Back to what you said, Del. He arranges to leave Harry. He says that Petunia took him in grudgingly, furiously, unwillingly, bitterly. (OoP) There was more contact than just the letter in the blankets. That seems obvious. It would be totally in character for Petunia to have had an outburst and laid down some rules of her own, if only to make herself believe that she had some control. (She does seem like a control freak-the spotless house and all.) And in character for DD to oblige. I can see her saying something along the lines of: "All right. We'll take him, but be clear on this: We'll have none of your sort poking around, arousing the neighbours' suspicions. We're a respectable family and we intend to stay that way. If a witch or wizard dares to put one finger over our property line, that boy'll be in the nearest orphanage before the hour is up. Do you hear me? You and your ilk will stay away if you want this boy living here." It would explain why a squib was needed to keep an eye on Harry during the early years. It would explain why DD never intervened. Of course, once the letters came, all that went right out the window and right into a flying Ford. Just a thought. No canon, just noting that it would be very like Petunia, and that it explains a few things. Ginger, who believes that catnip can be magically enhanced, but it wouldn't be good for you. Not that I eat much catnip. From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Fri Nov 19 19:47:00 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2004 19:47:00 -0000 Subject: Harry mastering his emotions in HPB (was: Plot in OotP) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118218 > Siriusly Snapey Susan, who, after viewing photos of the PoA launch > party in London, wants to take some scissors to some of these young > men's hair! [Check it out: > http://news.bbc.co.uk/cbbcnews/hi/newsid_4020000/newsid_4024300/402435 > 1.stm ; > http://news.bbc.co.uk/cbbcnews/hi/newsid_4020000/newsid_4024300/402435 > 1.stm ; http://www.hpana.com/imageviewer.cfm?nid=18404&f=dan- > alfonso.jpg ] Dang!! I know this part was OT, but I want to clarify, since the dang links didn't work. For the first two, cut & paste the URL, then look at photos 7 & 9. The final one works if you cut & paste the URL, I believe. Sorry, sorry!!! Siriusly Snapey Susan From sophierom at yahoo.com Fri Nov 19 20:10:47 2004 From: sophierom at yahoo.com (sophierom) Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2004 20:10:47 -0000 Subject: Unfortunate!Peter In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118219 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Barry Arrowsmith wrote: > > The earliest images we have of him are in the Pensieve memory. It is > not a comfortable picture. Although generally classed as one of the > Marauders, he's obviously the odd one out. To James he's an > appreciative audience, ready to admire and perhaps hero worship > whenever James feels like putting on a performance. To Sirius he's a > nothing, a hanger-on to be belittled; to Lupin - what? We don't really > know, Lupin acts as if he wasn't there. > > So why did they spend so much time and trouble encouraging him to > master the Animagus spell? Why did they tolerate him, what did they > need him for? Sophierom: As usual, a brilliant post. And as usual, I disagree, not through any fault in your reasoning, really, but because I think we interpret canon quite differently. Still, I had fun reading your post. :-) I wanted to comment particularly on this passage about the Pensieve scene because I think it suggests a fundamentally different interpretation we have about Peter. You see Peter in this scene as the "odd one out." He's certainly the lowest on the totem pole, but he has his role: he's the official James fan club; he's a "hanger-on" as you said. Let's look at the roles each of the four play: James - the one to be admired, the golden boy with the golden snitch; Sirius - the prankster, the troublemaker, the one who says "excellent" when he sees an opportunity to pick on Snape; Remus - the self-effacing, reasonable one, who, as you say, tries and fails to exert control over the antics of the gang leaders; and Peter, the follower, the fan, the hanger-on. His role is certainly not one to be admired or envied, but he's definitely not on the periphery of the group. He's almost a necessary component because without him, who worships James, who provides Sirius a target? This is why Sirius and James put up with him. And Peter knows this - he "turned slightly pink" when Sirius insulted him, but he didn't object because he thinks this is the role he has to play in order to stay on the good side of the most popular kids in school. Okay, so why the big deal about this? If Peter is the "odd one out," as you see him, then the idea that he could be the "informer" and DD's spy makes more sense - since he was on the periphery of the group, he feels less compunction, perhaps, serving as the spy or informer. But if he's quite simply the guy who always ends up following the strongest members of whatever group looks to be in power, well, then it makes a lot more sense that he really does turn to Voldemort sometime around 1980. He's only working for Voldemort because LV is the strongest guy around, and Peter only knows how to bow to the strong. Kneasy: "They cower before Voldy. Peter disagrees with him, tries to get him to change his mind about using Harry Potter for his scheme while they're at the Riddle House." Sophierom: Now, now. This isn't really a fair comparison. Peter "disagrees" with LV when LV is nothing more than a baddie in baby monster form. THe DEs who cower (including Peter) cower when LV has fully returned, when he can hold a wand and kill them without a problem. I do agree that Peter seems pretty adamant about wanting to use someone other than Harry for LV's return. Whether this is out of a feeling of obligation to Harry after the Shrieking Shack or Peter's own laziness and fear (it would be a heck of a lot easier to get someone like Bertha Jorkins than Harry Potter), I don't know. But I'm not so sure that Peter's squeaky, sputtering, panicky responses (GOF, pp.8-10, AM. ed) really constitutes a full-blown disagreement. Kneasy: "He's DD's eyes and ears in the Voldy camp and maybe the final safety net if Harry gets into a really sticky spot. Forget all this 'life debt' guff (a phrase invented by fans incidentally and not in canon). Peter will eventually help Harry and/or turn on Voldy for reasons that have little to do with the Shrieking Shack episode. He may already have done so." Sophierom: If Peter is really working of DD by the beginning of GoF or earlier as you say, if he's really Harry's "final safety net," why not bring baby volide to Dumbledore so that Harry can kill the little monster before he comes back to power? Peter has to help LV with just about everything early in GOF. He has LV's wand, he carries LV around, he feeds LV Nagini's milk in a bottle (oh, how sweet). If "Peter will eventually help Harry and/or turn on Voldy," why didn't he do it at this point, when LV was still relatively weak? Wouldn't that be in DD's best interests? Whether you see DD as puppet master, ESE, or goodness personified, it seems that DD would want LV out of the way as soon as possible. Kneasy: "Remember the graveyard, the bit where Harry escapes? Do you really think that one unaimed Impedimenta! spell thrown over his shoulder could have discommoded that many DEs, spread in a circle, all at once?" Sophierom: No, Harry's spell couldn't have "discommoded that many DEs," and it didn't. But neither did Peter. GOF, Am. ed., pp. 668-669: "From a muffled yell, [Harry] though he had stopped at least one of them, but there was no time to stop and look; he jumped over the cup and dived as he heard more wand blasts behind him; more jets of light flew over his head as he fell, stretching out his hand to grab Cedric's arm - 'Stand aside! I will kill him! He is mine!' shrieked Voldemort....Voldemort's red eyes flamed in the darkness. Harry saw his mouth curl into a smile, saw him raise his wand. 'Accio!' Harry yelled, pointing his wand at the Triwizard Cup. It flew into the air and soared toward him. Harry caught it by the handle - He heard Voldemort's scream of fury at the same moment that he felt the jerk behind his navel..." So, are you trying to argue that Peter somehow induced LV's megalomania? :-) The reason that Harry escapes is because Voldie is determined to kill Harry himself and thus Harry doesn't have any more curses to dodge as he calls out for the cup. It's a one-on-one at this point. Harry does not escape because of his one Impedimenta spell. He doesn't do away with the other DEs; Voldemort does because Voldemort can't stand to have anyone else triumph. You could argue, I suppose, that in between the Impedimenta and VOlide's "shriek," Peter was stopping some of the other DEs, but there are still "jets of light" flying over Harry's head, and how in the world would Peter explain to the other Death Eaters what he was doing? Uh, sorry mates, didn't mean to shoot at you, I have really bad aim. Not so sure that would fly. I'm sorry - don't mean to be overly flippant. :-) But I am wondering what you think Peter was doing to help Harry escape in this scene. Thanks again for the interesting post. I really did enjoy it, and I'm looking forward to you and many other people arguing with my admittedly faulty logic! :-) Best, Sophie From mgrantwich at yahoo.com Fri Nov 19 20:26:20 2004 From: mgrantwich at yahoo.com (Magda Grantwich) Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2004 12:26:20 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Harry left at the Dursleys (Was Re: Plot in OotP) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041119202620.27328.qmail@web53101.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 118220 --- lupinlore wrote: > What I CAN'T go with, and what I think Alla rejects as well, is the > idea that Dumbledore deliberately allows the abuse for the purpose > of "toughening Harry," etc. I think that even in the situation > with Snape there is a large element of "no choice." > > Lupinlore I think a lot of people are jumping to the conclusion that Dumbledore recognizing an unpalatable fact (i.e., that the Dursleys are a couple of idiots who are mean to Harry) equals Dumbledore "deliberately allowing" them to be mean to Harry. I haven't seen anyone arguing that point but I have seen a LOT of jumping to conclusions about it. Magda (not meaning to be mean to Lupinlore, if you know what I mean) __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Fri Nov 19 21:03:11 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2004 21:03:11 -0000 Subject: Harry left at the Dursleys (Was Re: Plot in OotP) In-Reply-To: <20041119202620.27328.qmail@web53101.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118221 Magda: > I think a lot of people are jumping to the conclusion that Dumbledore > recognizing an unpalatable fact (i.e., that the Dursleys are a couple > of idiots who are mean to Harry) equals Dumbledore "deliberately > allowing" them to be mean to Harry. I haven't seen anyone arguing > that point but I have seen a LOT of jumping to conclusions about it. > > Magda (not meaning to be mean to Lupinlore, if you know what I mean) Alla: I am not sure if you included me in this "jumping to conclusion" part, but I am going to reply anyway, because you confused me. So, let's start from the beginning. The only justification I see for Dumbledore "leaving Harry with Dursleys" will be if other choice for Dumbledore was that Harry will be killed otherwise. Many posters argued that ANOTHER reason for Dumbledore "leaving Harry with Dursleys" will be Dumbledore wanting to "toughen Harry up", to teach him tough life lessons, to prepare him for what is ahead. I think that such life lesons SHOULD not be taught to ANY child, even to one, whose destiny MAYBE to kill Voldemort. I argued that if this was the reason or one of the reasons, Dumbledore dose not deserve my sympathy. I don't understand what did you mean by "Dumbledore recognising that they are mean to Harry, does not equal allowing them to be mean to Harry?" If that was necessarily for Harry's survival, it does not matter what Dumbledore recognised or did not recognise. If that was necessary for "toughening up" then yes, if Dumbledore knew that Dursleys are couple of abusers, that equals him deliberately allowing them to abuse the child. I am very confused, sorry. From ginnysthe1 at yahoo.com Fri Nov 19 21:07:03 2004 From: ginnysthe1 at yahoo.com (ginnysthe1) Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2004 21:07:03 -0000 Subject: Plot in OotP In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118222 Kim here, after snipping liberally at Steve's post in order to focus on his questions about OotP: Steve asked: >Who was the Purple Slash Curse wizard? Difficult to tell, but there may be a reason for that. Who was the Baby Head Death Eater? Is it more important to identify him, or to move the story on to the next scene?< Kim sort of answers: I'm pretty sure the answers to the first two questions are in OotP someplace. I recall wondering who those DEs were myself the first time I read the book, and after carefully perusing the text, I found out who they were. Of course now I can't remember who they were... But I'll get back to you on that (if someone else doesn't beat me to it...) I think not being able to identify characters could be one more way JKR likes to puzzle her readers, if you want to give her credit for being that clever (and I do). But even if you can't find out who they are, you can still see them as part of the whole bizarre adventure of those last chapters. That's another reason I loved OotP: IMO it was JKR at her most bizarre, and the Dept. of Mysteries was on the top of the "bizarre" list for me, followed by, say, the Thestrals. But then bizarre is what I often like in literature, though it may not be to everyone's taste. Kim (who loves bizarre so much that she even enjoyed typing it 4 times) From stbjohn2 at yahoo.com Fri Nov 19 17:42:41 2004 From: stbjohn2 at yahoo.com (stbjohn2) Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2004 17:42:41 -0000 Subject: Unfortunate!Peter In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118223 Kneasy wrote about Peter: > The earliest images we have of him are in the Pensieve memory. It > is not a comfortable picture. Although generally classed as one of > the Marauders, he's obviously the odd one out. To James he's an > appreciative audience, ready to admire and perhaps hero worship > whenever James feels like putting on a performance. To Sirius he's > a nothing, a hanger-on to be belittled; to Lupin - what? We don't > really know, Lupin acts as if he wasn't there. > > So why did they spend so much time and trouble encouraging him to > master the Animagus spell? Why did they tolerate him, what did they > need him for? "Ah," some will say "it's because as a rat he could > immobilise the Whomping Willow, that's why." > "Oh, yes," says I "and how did they know he'd be a rat?" Because > they couldn't know, not in advance. Besides, I'm not so sure that > the tree was all that massive then and even in PoA Harry et al manage > quite nicely with a broken branch. Peter was not essential, yet they > persisted for years. Why? > (major snippage, cause this is the only point I'm going to address, but, as always, kneasy, an interesting post) Seems to me, Peter just got included in the group because he happened to share a dorm room with the other three, and there was no way to exclude him -- especially when they realized they had to protect Lupin's secret. Lupin himself admits his roommates -- and he specicially names Peter as well as James and Sirius -- couldn't help but notice his monthly absences and wonder what was up. Once they realized and decided to join in the adventure, they could hardly say, "well, not you, Peter, you're not clever enough" because he would have run off and broadcast that Lupin was a werewolf to all the school. The Pensieve scene makes it pretty clear the other three weren't thrilled to have Peter around, but they were stuck with him. Sandy, who thinks James and Sirius might have hatched a similar plot even if they didn't have a werewolf roomie. From azriona at juno.com Fri Nov 19 18:45:58 2004 From: azriona at juno.com (Sharon) Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2004 18:45:58 -0000 Subject: Unfortunate!Peter In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118224 I haven't posted before, so forgive any typographical errors I might make. I have been reading up on recent posts, however, with much interest, and look forward to some good Peter discussion, which I haven't had in some time. --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Barry Arrowsmith wrote: *snip* > Not a popular lad, is Peter. Not with the characters in the books and > not with the fans. No kidding. And quite frankly, I can never understand *why*. I mean, Peter's not all that different from Snape, when you think about it. Here's a guy, who everyone believed to be one thing - when in fact, he was someone else entirely. The only difference between Snape and Peter was who they spied for. Or was it? Kneasy, I have not always believed that Peter was a spy for Dumbledore, but over the last year I have come to believe it. I cannot believe that DD, knowing the odds and knowing his resources, would have not had more than one spy in place. And I cannot believe that a man who would willingly place an 11-, 12- and 13- year old boy in mortal danger would think that the odds of having a single spy would be enough upon which to wage a war. *snip* > The earliest images we have of him are in the Pensieve memory. It is > not a comfortable picture. No, it isn't. And while I agree that the Pensieve memory is the one we have of Peter *at his youngest* - it is by far not our first images of him. In fact, I would even argue that by the time we see Peter in that Pensieve, not only has our individual views of him been damanged by both Harry & Sirius' personal opinions, but even Snape himself can't give him a fair shake. I can't trust that Pensieve. We forget that we are seeing Peter through *Snape's* eyes, and I think most would agree that as far as the Marauders are concerned, Snape is hardly an impartial judge. We see James and Co. not as the boys they were, but as the boys they were *to Snape*. And what was Peter to Snape...but nothing? A tool of the two boys he hated most in the world, while the one boy who might have helped him sat in the shade and studied for the next exam! But moving on from that, Peter is absolutely the "forgotten" Marauder. And maybe there's a very good reason for that. Perhaps this is not something he resented, but something he actually craved. There are people who don't want to be in the spotlight, who are content to remain in the background. Peter may very well have been one of those - and perhaps it was that quality that attracted DD to recruiting him as a spy. > So why did they spend so much time and trouble encouraging him to > master the Animagus spell? Why did they tolerate him, what did they > need him for? The quick answer is "I don't know." The long answer is...well...long. The short answer is: because they liked him. And "like" isn't really something you can explain away. Why do I like my husband, other than the fact that he buys me HP Legos? I don't know. He's cute maybe. (And he buys me HP Legos.) Why did James & Co like Peter? I don't know, maybe he balanced them, and they knew they needed the balance he provided. *snip* Peter was not essential, yet they > persisted for years. Why? > I would argue that Peter *was* essential. (If for no other reason than as JKR's plot device.) What Peter provided the rest of the boys changes depending on who you're talking to - but Peter seems to have provided the encouragement James and Sirius needed in order to go ahead with their plans - whether those plans involved Snivellus' underwear or going to the kitchens to steal food. Or, as you also claim, to run to DD to tell him about The Prank. No, we don't know Peter's role in the Prank. But really, we don't know about Remus' role either, do we? We don't know that Remus really knew that Sirius might send Snape after him. We don't know when James found out about the Prank or how. We don't know a whole lot about the Prank - and the biggest clue that we don't know a lot is that JKR herself has said we're going to learn about it. Now, I don't know about you, but before she said that I thought the whole Prank issue was pretty much covered, way back in PoA. And now there's apparently *more* to know? Why do I have the feeling that the more to know deals with Peter's role in the entire sordid affair? > Then there's Moody's photograph. There's Peter, sitting between James > and Lily. Lots of fans have wondered about this; is it significant? Was > there unrequited affection (or even requited affection) between > James/Peter or between Lily/Peter? Why are James and Lily sitting > apart? Not being romantically inclined I've never read much into it, > but believe you me, others have. Ugh. I think it's more interesting that Moody, when presenting the photograph to Harry, doesn't actually mention Peter's name. Here he is, pointing out all these people in the photo who Harry's never heard of, much less *met*, and then we run into Peter Pettigrew, who of course Moody will know that Harry knows fairly well. I mean, we don't even get a "Oh, and there's that really awful Peter Pettigrew, I should just scratch his darn-ed face from the photo." Something there, I tells you. > > 2. Scabbers vanishes into the sewers. Right. Then what? Where does he > go? Who does he see? Want a suggestion? > OK - Dumbledore. Neither the DEs nor the MoM people believe he's > alive. Who's left? DD. It's maybe my memory, but unlike just about all > the adults in the books I can't remember DD ever saying or hinting or > commenting in PoA that he believed Peter was dead. If I'm wrong I'm > sure someone will correct me. > I don't think you're wrong. And in fact, I think you're more right than you might know. Dumbledore never once questions the story about Peter being SK - he never once degrades Peter in front of Harry - and he never once calls him "Wormtail." DD gives Peter every inch of respect there is to give, and even has some interest in his whereabouts - going as far as to interupt Harry in GoF about what Peter was doing during the cemetary scene. Why? Why does DD show such interest in Peter? Is it perhaps his way of making sure that his little spy is still behaving himself? > I think Peter is/has been paying penance, with the encouragement of DD, > for some act of foolishness, naivety or stupidity that contributed to > the deaths of the Potters. > Well...I don't know that Peter is paying penance. What does he have to pay penance for, exactly? (Okay, death of James & Lily, blah blah blah.) I should think that the general hatred of the world and his best friends would take care of that. I rather think that Peter has been living for the previous 12 years as a rat and continues to work with Voldie because he is A GOOD SPY. He's still under cover. Unlike Snape, he hasn't been outed! Why on earth would Peter do any differently than he has been doing? --azriona From bboyminn at yahoo.com Fri Nov 19 22:24:37 2004 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2004 22:24:37 -0000 Subject: People Changing - Harry mastering himself in HPB In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118225 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "lupinlore" wrote: > > SSSusan wrote: > > This is one of the reasons I've proposed before [and taken some > > grief for doing so, I might add :-)] that Harry will manage to > > find a way to work w/ Snape, even if Snape keeps on being a prick. > > ...edited... > lupinlore: > > Oh dear. Well, I suppose that's one way to solve it, but IMO would > be a very unsatisfactory way indeed. A thread like Snape's cries out > for resolution, and I just can't see any way for that to happen > unless Snape either 1) changes, or 2) dies. > > ...edited... > > Lupinlore bboyminn: I'm going to stray off on a tangent here; it has to do with how and if people can or will change. First, even if a bad character becomes good, that doesn't mean he will become nice. I too see Harry and Snape coming to an uneasy truce and have expressed that opinion before. But just because Harry and Snape overcome or overlook the conflicts between them doesn't mean Snape will become a sweet easy-going happy-go-lucky smiley-face birds-chirping flowers-blooming kind of guy. Snape's a prick, and even under the best of circumstances, he will always be a prick, just a slightly less hostile and more cooperative prick. In real life I have worked with people I did not like and who did not like me; I mean REALLY did not like. But our job wasn't to be best-buddies or to make war, it was to get the job at hand done. So despite our great dislike for each other, we set that aside and focused on the job. We behaved like professionals instead of school boys. I think Harry and Snape, once they get over the short-term Sirius related hostilies between them, will come to understand that there is a job to be done, and that job is not making war with each other, but making war with Voldemort. But, that doesn't mean they will suddenly be having a laugh while quaffing a few ales. They are never going to like each other, but at some point they will develope a begrudging respect for each other, and decide to peacefully co-exist. We can apply the same logic to other characters. Take Draco for example, I see his fate as either becoming the next Dark Lord, or suddenly realizing what being a Death Eater really means and wanting no part of it. I think Draco having a totally unrealistic idealized illusion of what it means to be a Death Eater is a key part to Draco's story. Once he sees the truth, he will be in for a very rude awakening. Whether you believe Draco will be redeemed or not isn't important, for the moment just consider it as an excesize in character analysis. If Draco joins the good side, just like Snape, that doesn't mean Draco will suddenly become a sweet ultra-nice best-buddy to Harry (or Ron or Hermione or Neville). Draco's a prick, and he always will be. He and Harry will always be at odds with each other. Draco will always look down on Harry and Harry's friends. If Snape and Harry come to an uneasy understanding and begrudging cooperation, as I believe they will, that doesn't mean Snape can't change or grow as a character. In fact, I see that as a great opportunity for Snape to grow as a character, and it opens the door to more of Snape's back story which gives him additional depth. But even if this story path reveals a slightly warmer and fuzzier Snape, Snape will still be a jerk, just a more sympathetic jerk. Another example, using one of the good guys. What are the odd that Prof. McGonagall will suddenly turn into Mary Poppins? Not good, not good at all. If it's unrealistic for McGonagall to make that transition, then it must be equally unrealistic for Draco or Snape to make that transition. Conclusion, you really can be good without being nice. Just passing it along. Steve/bboyminn (was bboy_mn) From gbannister10 at aol.com Fri Nov 19 22:36:19 2004 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2004 22:36:19 -0000 Subject: Plot in OotP In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118226 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Steve wrote: > >Who was the Purple Slash Curse wizard? Difficult to tell, but there > may be a reason for that. Geoff: He can be identified quite clearly from canon as Antonin Dolohov... '"WE'VE GOT HIM!" yelled the Death Eater nearest Harry. "IN AN OFFICE OFF -" "Silencio!" cried Hermione and the man's voice was extinguished...... ..But the Death Eater Hermione had just struck dumb made a sudden slashing movement with his wand; a streak of what looked like purple flame passed right across Hermione's chest. She gave a tiny "Oh!" as though of surprise and crumpled onto the floor where she lay motionless. "HERMIONE!" Harry fell to his knees beside her as Neville crawled rapidly towards her from under the desk, his wand held up in front of him. The Death Eater kicked out hard at Neville's head as he emerged - his foot broke Neville's wand in two and connected with his face. Neville gave a howl of pain and recoiled, clutching his mouth and nose. Harry twisted round, his own wand held high and saw that the Death Eater had ripped off his mask and was pointing his wand directly at Harry who recognised the long, pale, twisted face from the Daily Prophet: Antonin Dolohove, the wizaed who had murdered the Prewetts. Dolohov grinned. With his free hand, he pointed from the prophecy still clutched in Harry's hand, to himself and then to Hermione. Though he could no longer speak, his meaning could not have been clearer....' (OOTP "Beyond the Veil" pp.698/99 UK edition) From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Fri Nov 19 22:40:07 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2004 22:40:07 -0000 Subject: Magic by kids (was: "Conjured" food) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118227 I (Carol) wrote: > IOW, I think that some students are monitored more closely than > others, and Harry is monitored more closely than anyone else. The > underage magic restriction is probably impossible to enforce in all > instances. Carol responds to her own post. I don't mean that it's *always impossible* to enforce, only that it's *sometimes not possible*. Probably I should have said "some" instead of "all." Carol, realizing that what she means and what she says are not always identical From willsonkmom at msn.com Fri Nov 19 22:44:00 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2004 22:44:00 -0000 Subject: Plot in OotP In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118228 > Geoff: > He can be identified quite clearly from canon as Antonin Dolohov... > Potioncat: And wasn't baby-head narrowed down to two possible names? (Crabbe as one possible name?) Potioncat who is very proud of her snipping. Even if this is a oneliner post From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Fri Nov 19 23:11:00 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2004 23:11:00 -0000 Subject: snipping guidelines was Re: Occlumency: Relax or resist? ( In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118229 Potioncat wrote: > I've been frustrated at times when a person snipped too much of the > post they were responding to and it became hard to follow the > point. And I've been frustrated on a dial-up connection for a > poorly snipped post to take forever to load, particularly if the > responding portion was short. And I try to snip just the right > amount myself, not always sure I did a good job. > > It wouldn't be a bad idea for all of us to go back and review the > rules. Here's my attempt at a link: > > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/files/Admin_Files/Posting_Basics.html > > > OK, everyone, click on the link and take a look. I'll be right > there. > > Potioncat (becoming more like Molly everyday.) Carol: I fixed the link for you (I hope) by unchecking the "Wrap message text" box. Carol From carolynwhite2 at aol.com Fri Nov 19 23:15:59 2004 From: carolynwhite2 at aol.com (carolynwhite2) Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2004 23:15:59 -0000 Subject: Unfortunate!Peter In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118230 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "stbjohn2" wrote: > > Kneasy wrote about Peter: > > The earliest images we have of him are in the Pensieve memory. It > > is not a comfortable picture. Although generally classed as one of > > the Marauders, he's obviously the odd one out. > Sandy wrote: > Seems to me, Peter just got included in the group because he happened > to share a dorm room with the other three, and there was no way to > exclude him -- especially when they realized they had to protect > Lupin's secret. Lupin himself admits his roommates -- and he > specicially names Peter as well as James and Sirius -- couldn't help but notice his monthly absences and wonder what was up. Carolyn: It's an interesting theory, but that's not how it works with the trio, is it? Although Harry and Ron share a dorm, they don't hang out as a close group with Neville, Dean and Seamus, do they ? They are friends, and in the same house, but not fellow-conspirators. Interesting thought though, that Dumbledore not only admitted a werewolf to the school, but allowed him to share a room with three unsuspecting boys. He and Poppy Pomfrey would have to be really accurate predicting Lupin's werewolf phases wouldn't they, or there could have been a tragic accident or two. From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Fri Nov 19 23:23:37 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2004 23:23:37 -0000 Subject: Harry mastering his emotions in HPB (was: Plot in OotP) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118231 Alla wrote: > > Bravo! That is exactly how I feel. I think it will be my new > slogan "Snape, change or die!" :o) > I would prefer him to change than to die though. > > I am still hoping though that they will learn to respect each other > at the end, if not, well that I am keeping my fingers crossed that > Harry will save Snape's life. :) Carol responds: And I'm keeping mine crossed that Snape will save Harry's! Not yet another attempt, but a real, unquestionable rescue from deadly peril that proves once and for all that Snape is on the right side. Carol, belatedly thanking Alla for the welcome back From stbjohn2 at yahoo.com Fri Nov 19 19:01:51 2004 From: stbjohn2 at yahoo.com (stbjohn2) Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2004 19:01:51 -0000 Subject: Muggleborns choosing WW In-Reply-To: <000601c4ccdb$d3ac3900$704b6d51@f3b7j4> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118232 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "manawydan" wrote: > Pippin wrote: > >It seems to me jobs are like marriages, the people who are > >happy in them can find just as many things to complain about > >as the ones who aren't. We can't be sure Stan and Ernie aren't > >happy and contented because they've been taught not to aspire > >to anything better, just like the House Elves. > > Ffred replied: > It's true that the only time we see Ernie "off-duty", he's not > talking about the joys of being a bus conductor but then, you > can't but make allowances for the circumstances! > > If our own world is anything to go by, even though many people are > taught not to aspire to anything better, it doesn't stop them from > being discontented with their lot... > > But really, the point is that Muggles, like us, have to put a lot > of hard work in in order to get things done. There are a lot of hard, > dirty manual processes involved in almost everything from cooking and > cleaning up to mining and metal bashing. The WW doesn't have those > processes because magic is so much more efficient than technology: > its processes are clean, quick, and seemingly healthy. There just > isn't any evidence that the kind of pointless demeaning jobs that > abound in our world even exist there. And if you strip out the > unpleasant part of work, then it's understandable that job > satisfaction would be higher. Sandy Now: Maybe I'm just stuck in Muggle thought processes, but I don't see that most wizarding jobs are all that much different from their Muggle counterparts, or "stripped of the unpleasant part of work." Teachers still have to plan lessons, grade papers and keep an eye out for the exploding cauldron or stray spell that turns a student into a water buffalo or causes their teeth to grow like a beaver's; civil servants still have to deal with paperwork and red tape; shop keepers have to be physically present during business hours, etc. And magic just doesn't seem to be used as much as you seem to be thinking -- after all, the folks in Honeydukes climb down the stairs and carry up boxes of candy from the storeroom, instead of using the handy summoning charm, Waitresses bring out food and drink on trays, and the barkeep at the Hogs Head has the wipe the glasses, etc. Mrs. Weasley seems to fold the laundry by hand. We haven't seen any manufacturing processes, but even if Madam Malkin can bewitch scissors and needles to make robes, it seems she'd have to supervise the project -- make sure the needle makes gathers where they are needed in the sleeves or whatever. (If supervision wasn't needed, Hermione could just bewitch some knitting needles and let them churn out elf clothes day and night.) You can't just conjure up a flying broom, someone still has the tedious-sounding job of picking out the right sticks and twigs and putting them together properly, as well as adding the appropriate charms to guarantee it flies, is balanced and will brake when needed. An assembly line job to create a magical product. And not everyone seems thrilled with their jobs, either. Think of the receptionist at St. Mungo's, who spends her days telling people to check the board to find out which ward they need to go to ("Would you like fries with that?") I guess after you've seen a couple of people who've sprouted wings or turned into teapots, it gets a little old. I will grant you that driving the Knight Bus would be a whole lot more fun than the Muggle equivalent of driving a Greyhound through rural Mississippi, but even then you have to deal with nauseous passengers. The only job that sounds totally cool is the one there's no Muggle equivalent for -- Bill Weasley's exotic job as a curse-breaker in Egypt. But I'm sure it has its own dirty, dusty, dangerous drawbacks as well. Sandy From easimm at yahoo.com Fri Nov 19 23:09:20 2004 From: easimm at yahoo.com (curlyhornedsnorkack) Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2004 23:09:20 -0000 Subject: The length of the Pensieve Scene In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118233 > "curlyhornedsnorkack" wrote: > > Can you address the character's motives for taking advantage of > > a beautiful day to sit in a dense shade? Why didn't he set off > > for a nicer place, most likely the shade of the tree under which > > the Marauders settled, if he was unaware of them? Or why didn't > > he sit closer to the girls? > > Hickengruendler: > Sorry for my bluntness, but Snape can sit whereever he wants. Also, > assuming that the memory is objective (which I'm sure it is. I know > you are disagreeing, but let's assume for a moment it is), then it > doesn't matter if Snape might have planned something. Because this > had nothing to do with James and Sirius' motives. James and Sirius > attacked Snape because they were bored, not because they suspected > that Snape might attack them any minute. > > There is another scene that confirms the memory. When Harry told > Sirius and Remus about the incident, they didn't deny it. They didn't > say: "Well, the Pensieve is not objective. Snape started the fight." > They didn't even protest when Harry blamed them for bullying Snape > just because they were bored. Don't you think they would have said > something, if the situation weren't the way it seemed? If not for > their own sake, than surely for James'. I'm sure they don't want > Harry to believe such things about his father, if James never did > them. But instead they only said that James grew out of it, and that > Snape wasn't an innocent angel either. Which I'm sure is the truth, > but Sirius and Remus didn't do anything to correct Harry's view about > James deeds in this scene. Snape can sit where ever he pleases, that's fine with me. But the fact is that clues are there, including ones that don't depend on what you believe about the pensieve (see my previous messages) indicating that Snape was possibly doing more than just unluckily sitting in the wrong place. I haven't said that the Marauders were justified in the way they treated Snape. They certainly are bullies whatever Snape was doing. But it is possible they are annoyed with Snape for a specific reason. What was James supposed to say to Lily about the reason (I suspect) James was punishing Snape? "Snape's trying to expose our friend" wouldn't do, because it might set tongues waggling among other students? Or does James give a no-good-reason, such as "Because he exists" (OOTP) to stop inquiries flat? Also, just because Snape is bullied and treated badly doesn't mean he didn't have any harmful, or just harmless nosy intents himself. There are two more possible clues - note the "possible". If by "Buried in his exam questions..." JKR means he was holding the exam page in front of his face, then Snape could have been hiding his face. Also, the exam page is only one page as far as I can deduce. What's taking Snape so long to read the page? By the way, what is an exam paper exactly? Is it some sort of paper you give to students so that they can learn the right answers? I didn't grow up in the UK. "curlyhornedsnorkack" From ginnysthe1 at yahoo.com Sat Nov 20 00:57:04 2004 From: ginnysthe1 at yahoo.com (ginnysthe1) Date: Sat, 20 Nov 2004 00:57:04 -0000 Subject: Plot in OotP In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118234 Geoff wrote (about the DE that "purple-slashed" Hermione): >He can be identified quite clearly from canon as Antonin Dolohov...< Then Potioncat added: >And wasn't baby-head narrowed down to two possible names? (Crabbe as one possible name?)< Now Kim: I think baby-head was either Avery or Macnair (see text below). Since they were the two who were told by Lucius to go through the door that Harry, Hermione, and Neville were hiding behind (I think). But I'm not sure which of the two got baby-headed. Of course Potioncat might be right that baby-head was Crabbe... Anyhow, here's the part where Lucius gives the orders -- see what you think: "Footsteps and shouts echoed from behind the door they [i.e. H, H, and N] had just sealed; Harry put his ear close to the door to listen and heard Lucius Malfoy roar, 'Leave Nott, leave him, I say - his injuries will be nothing to the Dark Lord compared to losing that prophecy. Jugson, come back here, we need to organise! We'll split into pairs and search, and don't forget, be gentle with Potter until we've got the prophecy, you can kill the others if necessary - Bellatrix, Rodolphus, you take the left; Crabbe, Rabastan, go right - Jugson, Dolohov, the door straight ahead - Macnair and Avery, through here - Rookwood, over there - Mulciber, come with me!' The "door straight ahead" couldn't have been the H/H/N door because Dolohov wasn't one of the two DEs they fought with in that room (I don't think so, anyway), and "through here" seems to indicate the door they (Lucius and the DEs) were standing right in front of. But I could be wrong. JKR aims to confuse! And thanks, Geoff, for ID-ing Dolohov as the purple-slasher. Baby-Head and the Purple-Slasher -- great comic book (or WWF) names! Kim From annegirl11 at juno.com Sat Nov 20 00:41:49 2004 From: annegirl11 at juno.com (annegirl11 at juno.com) Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2004 19:41:49 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Unfortunate!Peter Message-ID: <20041119.195740.3712.1.annegirl11@juno.com> No: HPFGUIDX 118235 Barry said: > Most of both groups are of the opinion that he > should be veiled, ringing a hand-bell and crying "Unclean, > unclean..." Funny, my friend and I were just arguing about this last night. > To James he's an appreciative audience, To Sirius he's > a nothing, a hanger-on to be belittled Yup, agree. > to Lupin - what? I think Peter was a little afraid of Remus, similar to Ron's reaction when he found out Remus is a werewolf. Thing is, I think Peter is merely increadibly *normal*. He only reacted to Remus the way the rest of the wizarding world does. Here's my theory on Peter and the Marauders (and it assums a R/S ship, but it's a small part.): The Marauders started hanging around when they were 11. Little boys don't have the deepest of conversations, so it wasn't a big thing that (as it would later come out), Peter has slightly more traditional opinions than the rest of them. As kids, it was always James and Sirius, brothers and ringleaders, and Peter a close second because J and S were young and egotistical enough to appreciate Peter's fawning adoration. Remus was their friend, but he was quiet and aloof, and sometimes distant (because of his lycanthropy). I imagine Remus has friends separate from the Marauders at that time; it wasn't until they were older that the group solidified. The catylist for change was when James and Sirius found out that Moony was a werewolf. It affected them greatly; that this boy who was really cool and nice and smart couldn't be some horrible monster the way people said. As usual, adults were stupid and wrong (as all kids think); werewolves were just regular people who wolfed out once a month. J and S just assumed Peter accepted Remus as much as they did, because Peter sure as hell wouldn't offer a dissenting opinion. J or S was distraught that Remus' change was so painful ([this is where I assume a ship began]), so they started working on the animagus spell. It would be *brilliant*, and it would help their friend. There wasn't a question that Pete was in on the project; he was part of the group. As the Marauders got older and matured, the friendship dynamics changed, as friendships do. James started hanging around Lily and eventually dating her; [Sirius and Remus paired off.] [Nonship alternate: With James spending less time with his guy friends, Sirius and Remus became closer friends.] (Peter certainly wasn't going to become Sirius' new best friend.) By 7th year, Peter began to really feel his tagalongness; he wasn't as smart as his friends, and didn't have the same after school ambitions. Plus, for years, Peter had been the scapegoat of the friends. Not in a cruel way (much), but when James and Sirius tended to turn their harsh "playful" joking in Peter's direction. Kids can be cruel, even to their friends. Adding to it, Peter didn't understand why he was the odd man out. Why did James and Sirius like Remus so much better, when he was so scary every full moon? (Remember, Peter was a little rat during the transformations, not a larger, more capable animal.) [Shippy: Peter, like virtually everyone else in the 70s, was a little squicked that R and S were suddenly gay and messing around together.] After school, they drifted even more. James and Lily married; Sirius and Remus were living together [(platonically or not)]. It left a lot of time for Peter to go off on his own, meet different friends. He just met the wrong people. Sirius and James were extrodinary boys. They were *popular*, handsome, charming, and too confident by half. Their friendship and loyalty was spectacular, that they not only accepted Remus despite his lycanthropy but risked their own life and freedom to do something dangerous (and fun) to help him. S and J were also brave and smart enough to want to become Aurors, and admirable enough to want to fight with Dumbledore in the war. Peter? Was adverage. Ordinary. Maybe if he'd been sorted into Hufflepuff, he'd have found other adverage friends and been a bigger fish in a smaller pond. But it just didn't work out that way. In a lot of ways, Peter is a tragic figure, too. Aura ~*~ "What he didn't like about heroes was that they were usually suicidally gloomy when sober and homicidally insane when drunk." - Discword http://archive.skyehawke.com/authors.php?no=606 From annegirl11 at juno.com Fri Nov 19 23:22:46 2004 From: annegirl11 at juno.com (annegirl11 at juno.com) Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2004 18:22:46 -0500 Subject: DD as a grownup (was:Re: [HPforGrownups] Re: Plot in OotP Message-ID: <20041119.195740.3712.0.annegirl11@juno.com> No: HPFGUIDX 118236 Alla said: > Alla: > No, definitely not. Wait. Your name's Alla? I've been calling you by your email addy this whole time! Why didn't you say something? Sorry! But sign your posts, darling! > Oh, of course. The question is though whether he at least tries to > remember that his soldiers are human beings. Most of the time, I think yes. But, as you said, I don't trust that he always understands the psychology of the people he leads. (MOST of the time, yes. But he's fallable.) I don't think it's so much that he's old -- he does have a youthful side -- but that he came of age in a different world. He was born around 1840; "generation gap" doesn't begin to cover the differences between DD and Sirius and DD and Harry. :) When DD was a kid, locking your kid in the corn crib and whipping them with a switch was normal, respectable parenting. And, as an old nona in a movie said: "When I was young, you did what you had to do [jobwise]. And if you didn't like it? Well, you did it anyway." The idea that 12GP was a bad idea because Sirius may not be *happy* probably didn't weigh to much in his consideration. DD probably thought it was good for Sirius to face his demons and get over them. I don't mean to call DD foolish. 100 years ago, even 50 years ago, this is how things were. This was common sense. DD came of age in a harsher world when the needs of the individual weren't as important as the needs of the group; this mentality was necesary for survival. Incidentally, this does coincide with DD being presented as "the epitome of goodness." He has good intentions. He tries. He just doesn't always succeed. Incidentally2: I don't really consider what JKR says in interviews when it comes to analyzing the books. Between human error, tone of voice that doesn't come across in interviews, and her wily crafty ways, taking interviews as canon just isn't sound. When it comes to interpreting the text, I always go with the text. Aura ~*~ "What he didn't like about heroes was that they were usually suicidally gloomy when sober and homicidally insane when drunk." - Discword http://archive.skyehawke.com/authors.php?no=606 From annegirl11 at juno.com Sat Nov 20 01:02:37 2004 From: annegirl11 at juno.com (annegirl11 at juno.com) Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2004 20:02:37 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Unfortunate!Peter Message-ID: <20041119.200350.3712.2.annegirl11@juno.com> No: HPFGUIDX 118237 Carolyn said: > Interesting thought though, that Dumbledore not only admitted a > werewolf to the school, but allowed him to share a room with three > unsuspecting boys. He and Poppy Pomfrey would have to be really > accurate predicting Lupin's werewolf phases wouldn't they, or there > could have been a tragic accident or two. How hard is it to predict a full moon? The school has a working astronomy tower. Or, ykno, they could look at a printed calendar. Aura ~*~ "What he didn't like about heroes was that they were usually suicidally gloomy when sober and homicidally insane when drunk." - Discword http://archive.skyehawke.com/authors.php?no=606 From ginnysthe1 at yahoo.com Sat Nov 20 01:19:30 2004 From: ginnysthe1 at yahoo.com (ginnysthe1) Date: Sat, 20 Nov 2004 01:19:30 -0000 Subject: Plot in OotP (off-topic P.S. to 118234) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118238 P.S. from Kim: Here's another gem of an excerpt from the same chapter of OotP: "The Death Eater had pulled his head out of the bell jar. His appearance was utterly bizarre, his tiny baby's head bawling loudly while his thick arms flailed dangerously in all directions, narrowly missing Harry, who had ducked. Harry raised his wand but to his amazement Hermione seized his arm. 'You can't hurt a baby!'" Hilarious! Poor Hermione, always trying to do the right thing! And I'll bet odds that they keep that line in the movie version of Phoenix. Cheers, Kim From iris_ft at yahoo.fr Sat Nov 20 01:51:38 2004 From: iris_ft at yahoo.fr (iris_ft) Date: Sat, 20 Nov 2004 01:51:38 -0000 Subject: The Art of Love according to Albus Dumbledore (was:Harry left at the Dursleys) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118239 Forgive me if I start my message without quoting any former post. I hope I've read the whole thread correctly. Dumbledore is currently paddling in my Pensieve, so I take the opportunity to try to clarify my own speculations, with your help if you will. On that point, I can only make suppositions; I'm unable to choose which interpretation is the most relevant. It's true that Dumbledore's position towards Harry seems rather contradictory. On one hand, we have what he tells him at the end of OotP, that he loves him. On the other hand, we have his decision of leaving Harry, who was at the time a helpless and wounded baby, on the doorstep of 4 Privet Drive. Doing that, he perfectly knew that Harry would be given a very hard time; Minerva Mac Gonagall had warned him. Dumbledore himself is giving us a hard time, because we can't see easily how we could conciliate what looks like a cold, necessary decision, and the love he feels towards Harry. How can you decide to leave an innocent baby with people who are going to make him suffer, say it's for his own good, and then, fifteen years later, tell him you love him? Well, it depends on the point of view, but both elements are not necessarily incompatible It's true that at first glance, Dumbledore's decision of leaving Harry at the Dursleys, though he knows they are able to make him suffer, seems incompatible with the kid's own interest, even if there's that matter of blood protection; and of course, it also seems incompatible with the idea of love. Except if you consider it from an alchemical point of view. I know what I'm going to write may sound completely contradictory with common sense and with the way we consider our duty towards children. But Alchemy has its own logic, and it is logic beyond logic. If we consider the end of the very first chapter of the series, we can see it describes not only the beginning of Harry's adventures, but also the beginning of an alchemical process. We have Albus Dumbledore playing the part of the alchemist. As his work needs to be secret, first he puts every light out from Privet Drive. And then he waits for the time to start working. He doesn't wait alone. He's with a person named Minerva, after the goddess of wisdom. In that chapter, Minerva Mac Gonagall portrays on one hand the patience of alchemical wisdom: transfigured into a cat, she has been able to spend a whole day waiting on a wall. But more especially, she represents on the other hand the limits of "common wisdom". She appears full of sense; she warns Dumbledore and tells him the Dursleys are not precisely the kind of persons a wizard would rely on; she criticizes Hagrid's carelessness. At the same time, she admits Dumbledore belongs to a dimension she doesn't understand plainly, when she says things like "And I don't suppose you are going to tell me why you are here, of all places?" or when she prefers not to counter Dumbledore's decision ( "Professor Mc Gonagall opened her mouth, changed her mind, swallowed and then said, `Yes- yes, you're right of course.") Thanks to her, to her objections, JKR manages to let us understand there's something concerning Harry that doesn't necessarily belongs to our common logic and wisdom. Another clue is Dumbledore's watch, that he checks before telling Mac Gonagall he wants to leave Harry alone with the Dursleys, and that doesn't work like the other watches. JKR writes "It must have made sense to Dumbledore". In other words, what is going to happen next doesn't make sense to everyone, even to a wise witch like Minerva Mac Gonagall. Then comes Harry, with his scar on his forehead. He comes from the sky, in the hands of a giant. Do you remember what JKR writes when she describes Hagrid's hands? She says they are "the size of dustbin lids". It's a rather strange image, not particularly flattering. Except if you remember that in Alchemy, the Materia Prima, the raw material, is described as "vile, despised", and that it has to suffer "putrefaction" in order to become the Philosopher's Stone. The image of Hagrid's hands looking like "dustbin lids" gives the impression that the baby they hold is a poor and vile little thing. However, the three wizards handle him with care, making us understand we mustn't trust his humble aspect. Here is Harry associated with the Materia Prima, that has been "opened" (he's wounded) in order to start its successive transfigurations. In that story, Harry first plays the part of the Materia Prima. He will be playing it for ten long years, and then he will also play the part of the apprentice (when he comes to Hogwarts). Here we can feel tempted with calling Dumbledore a cold manipulator. But he is not. He only owns a wisdom that doesn't belong to our common sense. He's an alchemist, and his logic is not ours. But it doesn't mean he has no moral, and he is ready to do reprehensible things because they serve his purpose. Do you know the other name of Alchemy? The Art of Love. The Alchemist works because he loves the nature and wants to help it to improve. And though he has to make his raw material suffer in the fire of his melting pot, he loves it, and he acts for the best to help it become the Philosopher's Stone. I admit that's something difficult to understand, especially when "the raw material" happens to be a helpless little child, and not a mineral entity. But that's where Dumbledore becomes interesting. He's an alchemist working on a human subject. He wishes Harry good luck before leaving him. Can we call him a coward or a false-hearted alchemist, who let the Dursleys do "the dirty job"? They abuse Harry, they make him suffer, but Dumbledore doesn't move. Is he indifferent, or as cold as Voldemort? I don't think so. The chapter of OotP called "The lost prophecy" is there as an evidence. That chapter is in my opinion like a mirror reflecting the memory of what happens at the beginning of the series. They have Dumbledore's tears as a connection. To the tears he manages to hide in the "Boy who lived" chapter ("Dumbledore gave a great sniff") respond the tears he doesn't manage to control at the end of the "Lost prophecy" chapter. We generally admit that Harry's story is a tragedy. It also applies to Dumbledore's. During the "Lost prophecy" chapter, Dumbledore says he didn't dare tell Harry the truth before, because he loved him and he wanted to spare him. I confess that, like Harry, I was upset with Dumbledore when I read that chapter. But at the same time, I could feel how lonely that old man had been for sixteen years, with a terrible secret he was the only one to know. Can you tell a young kid he has to die? Or do you prefer to let him ignore what's coming up? Personally, I don't know what I would have done if I had been in his shoes. How can you view the departure of a child? How could Dumbledore view the departure of the child he had hold in his arms fifteen years before? Love is something that can hurt, especially when death is lurking around. Dumbledore didn't tell Harry the truth because he wanted to spare him psychologically, but also because he wanted to spare himself. One more time, we need to come back to that very first chapter of the series, and to one parameter we tend to neglect: as Minerva Mac Gonagall told Dumbledore, the Dursleys were unable to understand Harry. Sometimes I wonder if that incapacity to understand the kid wasn't an efficient protection too. Or better said: an unexpected magical device. A protection for both Harry and Dumbledore. Let's imagine what Harry's life would have been if he had lived amongst wizards. They would have been in charge with the kid who had defeated the Dark Lord. Harry would have grown up with people observing him, trying to understand how he had managed to survive the Avada Kedavra, while other people, including his parents, had died. Consider now what Dumbledore tells Mac Gonagall in the very first chapter: "It would be enough to turn any boy's head. Famous before he can walk and talk! Famous for something he won't even remember! Can't you see how much better off he'll be, growing up away from all that until he's ready to take it?" These words come to a particular light now we can read OotP. We can see plainly that they announce the "Lost Prophecy", and the burden Harry has to take as "the one with the power to vanquish the Dark Lord". At the beginning of PS/SS, Dumbledore already knows what the prophecy says. And when he leaves Harry at the Dursleys, it's not only to protect his life. It's also to protect him against the burden waiting for him. Being "the Boy Who Lived", Harry would have been too close to "The One with the Power to Vanquish the Dark Lord". Maybe Dumbledore wanted to protect him not only from the Dark side, but also from his fate. That's what we can suppose if we trust what he tells Harry at the end of OotP. He didn't know how to do it, and how to answer the question Harry would probably ask him soon or later. We can wonder if Dumbledore didn't feel completely helpless with that prophecy concerning Harry. I know that in a former post, I speculated on the prophecy possibly being a part of Dumbledore's operations in order to transfigure the Wizard World. I'm absolutely unable to decide whether that prophecy was made independently from Dumbledore's will, or not. Whichever option is relevant, there's however something we can nearly give for sure, if the old man is sincere: Dumbledore probably didn't expect he would love Harry so much, and that his work with him would turn out to be so difficult. We can consider he has been manipulating people (Trelawney, Voldemort, Harry, everyone ), controlling the game in order to reach his goal. We can also consider that on the contrary, he has only been acting for the best, following events he couldn't control. Harry is there every time, making things harder than expected. But Dumbledore knows what it is like to face Harry, because he previously faced himself. Every thing he tells the boy in the "Lost prophecy" chapter, when Harry shouts, destroys his office, shows that he probably passed through similar sufferings. "The fact you can feel pain like this is your greatest strength." "What don't I know?" "Harry, suffering like this proves you are still a man! This pain is part of being human-" "You do care. You care so much you feel as though you will bleed to death with the pain of it." He couldn't know so well if he hadn't suffered himself. Maybe he's telling us what he felt fifteen years ago. But you can also notice he remains very quiet while Harry is shouting. It's not indifference. Simply, Dumbledore masters his own emotions, just like he did with Mac Gonagall fifteen years before. He reacts on the "alchemical level", using his own suffering and turning it into compassion, in order to give Harry the possibility to understand what being human means. He empathises with Harry, following the alchemical process of analogy. He knows Harry's pain, and in that pain, he recognizes himself. It could be a definition for love, in its more universal and noble dimension. And he also knows Harry has to bear that pain, to master it alone, as he did himself before him. That's also what the master has to share with his disciple. Maybe Dumbledore wasn't there when the Dursleys were abusing Harry. But when the boy really needs him, i.e., when he faces plainly for the first time the hardest trial, the trial of his burning human consciousness, he is with him. He doesn't do Harry's work. But he is there to tell him it's possible. That's what a true master has to do, before the disciple becomes a master himself. "I have watched you more closely than you can have imagined", Dumbledore says before telling Harry the truth. In other words: "I was there before you, I've passed through the same trials; and for that reason, I'm always with you, though you don't realize." These are the words of the Alchemist considering his work, his disciple; but also of the tragic characters (fictional or not) moving along with us since the beginning of human history. Just the way I see it, of course, Amicalement, Iris From bob.oliver at cox.net Sat Nov 20 04:17:07 2004 From: bob.oliver at cox.net (lupinlore) Date: Sat, 20 Nov 2004 04:17:07 -0000 Subject: I'll Never forgive Him (was Re: Harry mastering his emotions in HPB) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118240 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Jen Reese" wrote: > > But I do think Snape and Harry, unlike Snape and Sirius, will find > some way to *work* together even if the nastiness continues on both > sides. And Harry is only getting older and more confident--Snape > better watch out. > Well, they are going to have to go a long way to reach this point. Recall the "I will never forgive him," scene in OOTP. An author doesn't go to the trouble of setting up a scene like that, and at the end of a book no less, without it meaning something. I think we may see a very icy cold war between these two. It may be restrained for the sake of reaching a goal, but nevertheless a war. I would find that much more realistic and more satisfying than the "noble path" Harry, which I would view as a cop out on JKR's part. I will go so far as to say that if this whole situation turns out to be just a set up for Harry to be noble and learn to control his emotions, I will give very serious thought to leaving the fandom. I agree that Harry is getting older and more confidant, and may well try to needle Snape at every opportunity. Remember JKR's comment about Snape that "you mustn't think he's too nice, he's worth keeping an eye on, definitely." Although many people interpret this to refer to Snape's past, that phrasing indicates to me that he *will* do something damaging. I think it possible that needling on Harry's part might eventually push all of Snape's buttons, leading him to lose control of his feelings and do something very bad. I can unfortunately see it going the other way. Snape could actually escalate his hostility toward Harry, resulting in Harry finally losing control and doing something very damaging -- perhaps to Snape. Thus, Harry learns the hard way the necessity to control his emotions. At this point I think we've come down to personal preferences. My own preference is to see a cold war scenario, as I would find the "turn the other cheek" Harry to be, dare I say it, poor writing. Now that's just me of course. But nevertheless, I can't pretend I wouldn't make exclamations of disgust if JKR went in that direction. Lupinlore From jlnbtr at yahoo.com Sat Nov 20 04:03:54 2004 From: jlnbtr at yahoo.com (Juli) Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2004 20:03:54 -0800 (PST) Subject: Unfortunate!Peter Message-ID: <20041120040354.79723.qmail@web53109.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 118241 Kneasy: > 2. Scabbers vanishes into the sewers. Right. Then what? Where does he go? Who does he see? Want a suggestion? OK - Dumbledore. Neither the DEs nor the MoM people believe he's alive. Who's left? DD. It's maybe my memory, but unlike just about all the adults in the books I can't remember DD ever saying or hinting or commenting in PoA that he believed Peter was dead. If I'm wrong I'm sure someone will correct me. Juli: So, DD knew Peter was alive and still he let Sirius spend 12 years in Azkaban? I don't think DD could be that cruel. If he knew Peter was alive wouldn't he ask some questions? He may have thought Sirius was the SK but still I would have some questions, like why would an inocent man spend 12 years as a rat? He may not have mentioned it but he must have thought he was dead. >At the Shrieking Shack it took two wizards wielding two wands simultaneously to switch him back to human form and I begin to suspect that Peter has been spelled. He might not even be in animagus form at all, he could have been transfigured. And who's the Transfiguration Supremo? DD. But why would DD transform Peter into a rat? It makes no sense (at least to me), and if he did, in every book and television show I've ever seen about magic only the person who cast the spell could undo it, Yeah I know JKR can change the rules, but still, Remus did say he was going to force Peter to transform. > Another oddity; when Scabbers runs away (when Ron thinks Crookshanks has eaten him), where does he hide? Hagrid's Hut. I think it's obvious, Hagrid cares for animals, so one more would make no difference, besides Hagrid seems to know some things about what's going on outside Hogwarts so it would be a good place to hear any news (like LV was back). >"..nobody went bad 'cept they was Slytherin" Hagrid was just making a statment, and it's true most of the Dark Wizards belong to Slytherin, one more one less doesn't make a whole difference. > I think Peter works for DD - and probably has for a long time. Then WHY would DD want LV to return? The smart choice would be to let Harry grow up until he's prepared to face and vanquish LV for good. It's just my opinion, but who knows you may be right, but still this would mean than DD wanted LV back. And ESE!DD theory doesn't seem to be at possible. Juli, thinking when or if we'll ever find out if all we think is true or completly false. From snow15145 at yahoo.com Sat Nov 20 05:17:36 2004 From: snow15145 at yahoo.com (snow15145) Date: Sat, 20 Nov 2004 05:17:36 -0000 Subject: Unfortunate!Peter In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118242 Kneasy snipped: I'm often accused of thinking the worst of everybody in the books. Well, at least that way I never feel let down when somebody 'trustworthy' does the dirty. But just for a change I'm changing my viewpoint. It's to fulfill a sort of promise I made a few days ago. I'm arguing that somebody almost universally accepted as being ESE is on the side of the angels. Snow: This post if nothing else is extremely thought provoking! At least to me. I am as intrigued by Peter as I was in post #102786 but more so from your latest subject points. In support of your theory I would like to add my own latest thoughts that were inspired as a result: Does Snape know of Peter, Wormtail, the traitor, or the secret keeper all of whom are outwardly suspected as the Rat-Scabbers? Very power packed question isn't it, if you think about it? The incompetent, mostly ignored, dumbfounded Peter is supposedly four different portrayals of himself. He is Peter Pettigrew who was slain by Sirius, his so-called-friend in the most unique and unbelievable encounter and escaped, He was implied to be the traitor among the Order (which is a laugh and a post all in itself), He was supposedly made the secret keeper for the Potters, He lived twelve years as basically a sleeping (no worries) rat named Scabbers. Come on! For such an insignificant character that has extremely little page time other than these accusations or supposed portrayals, how can anyone not question his true involvement? I wouldn't even believe Sirius to have played all of these significant parts who has a background to support his capabilities of achieving such a goal. But Peter of all people to obtain even one of these roles is highly speculative, other than possibly the no worries, sleeping rat; Scabbers. I know all the `what about(s)', like the street scene with Sirius ahem DD! Wasn't Dumbledore already well aware of the horrific incident at Godric's Hollow? Do you really think that he would not have had someone, himself, working out who actually was involved. Ok then there is the fact of Cedric's death. Here lies the true test, did Wormtail kill Cedric. What if Cedric is not dead? Stay with me here. I know it sounds utterly ridiculous but when we learned of the tri-wizard tournament and why it was discontinued; we also learned that Dumbledore had put in place a protection against anyone becoming seriously injured (I believe this evidence can be found somewhere around the second task, no time to look it up right now but I will). Could this be why Harry was asked, and succeeded, in returning Cedric's body to Hogwarts? Sounds like a strange request when no one else in the wizarding world appears to acknowledge dead bodies. Lets get back to the `did Snape know' aspect and all that it inferred. JKR covered herself extremely well to this notion when Karkaroff noted that not all death-eaters knew one another huge clue you cannot connect the dots when this type of wrench is thrown in. Why did JKR purposely through in this wrench? The answer is still a question might Snape have known who, who knows? This is reason to be speculative! JKR lays clues but they are clues that are so evasive, like the fact that not all the death-eaters knew each other, that only a mind that could create such a story could actually supersede her to the eventual ending. Snow From azriona at juno.com Sat Nov 20 07:03:04 2004 From: azriona at juno.com (Sharon) Date: Sat, 20 Nov 2004 07:03:04 -0000 Subject: Unfortunate!Peter In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118243 Snow: > Does Snape know of Peter, Wormtail, the traitor, or the secret > keeper > all of whom are outwardly suspected as the Rat-Scabbers? Azriona: No. I don't think Snape knew, before the entire Shrieking Shack scene, that Sirius was innocent or that Peter was a DE, or the SK. If Snape *had* known, I think he would have told DD immediately, and DD would have long known that Peter wasn't dead. Or (now that I think on it) maybe Snape did know that Peter was a DE - and going with my theory that Peter was actually a spy for DD as well - and Snape did tell DD, and DD did...nothing. Because why would he? He already knew that Peter was not only a DE, but he was also one of his Pet Spies. ("Here you go, good little spies who don't know about each other. Have a cookie, go bring down the Big Bad Guy.") So even if Snape did know that Peter was a DE (which in all honesty, I still doubt), I don't think he would have known that he was a spy for Dumbledore, or vice versa. Snow: > What if Cedric is not dead? Stay with me here. I know it sounds > utterly ridiculous but when we learned of the tri-wizard tournament > and why it was discontinued; we also learned that Dumbledore had > put in place a protection against anyone becoming seriously injured > (I believe this evidence can be found somewhere around the second > task, no time to look it up right now but I will). Azriona: No, you're right. But I think that by removing the two boys from the actual playing field, it removed the protections that DD set up. The events in the graveyard were not part of the Tournament; therefore, they were outside of whatever barriers DD had arranged to prevent death or dismemberment. * And while I'm here: Aura: > Maybe if he'd been sorted into Hufflepuff, he'd have found other > average friends and been a bigger fish in a smaller pond. Azriona: Maybe. When the Marauders are split up between the Houses, Peter (with very few exceptions) goes to Hufflepuff - it's certainly the house other than Gryffindor that seems to fit him best. But for all that, there was a *reason* that the Hat put him in Gryffindor with Remus and Sirius (because James had not been sorted by the time Peter took the stool). Maybe because his loyalty to those two boys could not be questioned, or because his bravery was largely dependant upon them? Juli: > So, DD knew Peter was alive and still he let Sirius > spend 12 years in Azkaban? I don't think DD could be > that cruel. If he knew Peter was alive wouldn't he ask > some questions? He may have thought Sirius was the SK > but still I would have some questions, like why would > an inocent man spend 12 years as a rat? He may not > have mentioned it but he must have thought he was > dead. Azriona: Falling back on the Spy!Peter theory - DD knew that Peter was alive, and by outing him as the true culprit of the events at GH, he would have outed his second spy. Snape had already been outed. DD couldn't afford to lose another spy. Why he chose to sacrifice Sirius on Peter's altar, I don't have a clue. But obviously, Peter is much more important to DD than Sirius Black. Juli: > Then WHY would DD want LV to return? Azriona: Because if DD waits for Harry to grow up and become a man, the series will be longer than 7 books and JKR will go the way of Robert Jordan's Wheel of Time series, and no one really wants that. --az From nrenka at yahoo.com Sat Nov 20 07:51:08 2004 From: nrenka at yahoo.com (nrenka) Date: Sat, 20 Nov 2004 07:51:08 -0000 Subject: Unfortunate!Peter In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118244 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Sharon" wrote: > Juli: > > So, DD knew Peter was alive and still he let Sirius > > spend 12 years in Azkaban? I don't think DD could be > > that cruel. If he knew Peter was alive wouldn't he ask > > some questions? He may have thought Sirius was the SK > > but still I would have some questions, like why would > > an inocent man spend 12 years as a rat? He may not > > have mentioned it but he must have thought he was > > dead. > > Azriona: > Falling back on the Spy!Peter theory - DD knew that Peter was > alive, and by outing him as the true culprit of the events at GH, > he would have outed his second spy. Snape had already been outed. > DD couldn't afford to lose another spy. Why he chose to sacrifice > Sirius on Peter's altar, I don't have a clue. But obviously, Peter > is much more important to DD than Sirius Black. Perhaps it is a suggestion that that action doesn't really make sense for Dumbledore to do, then, to deliberately sacrifice like such...and perhaps that kicks a bit of a hole in a theory. After all, when you end up with things that really make no sense, sometimes it's because of holes in knowledge, and sometimes it's because the theory doesn't mesh with actuality, known or unknown. > Juli: > > Then WHY would DD want LV to return? > > Azriona: > Because if DD waits for Harry to grow up and become a man, the > series will be longer than 7 books and JKR will go the way of > Robert Jordan's Wheel of Time series, and no one really wants that. I suspect that argument was done in jest, but no fair skipping from internal plot arguments out to meta, really. :) That's a big problem for me, too. DD seems content, even focused, on this delaying plan wherein Harry can get experience, grow up, and some things can possibly be changed in the WW for greater preparedness. It's completely and utterly in DD's best interest to keep Voldemort down as long as he can--but Peter's escape and the events of GoF really throw a wrench into everything there, and we have a Harry facing Voldemort before it was really ideal. I can't imagine any way that having Voldemort brought back earlier rather than later is advantageous to Dumbledore's plan as stated at the end of OotP. -Nora stays up late to catch the early train to catch an early flight, and then *poof* From hickengruendler at yahoo.de Sat Nov 20 09:24:18 2004 From: hickengruendler at yahoo.de (hickengruendler) Date: Sat, 20 Nov 2004 09:24:18 -0000 Subject: Plot in OotP In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118245 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "ginnysthe1" wrote: > > Geoff wrote (about the DE that "purple-slashed" Hermione): > >He can be identified quite clearly from canon as Antonin Dolohov...< > > Then Potioncat added: > >And wasn't baby-head narrowed down to two possible names? (Crabbe as > one possible name?)< > > Now Kim: > I think baby-head was either Avery or Macnair (see text below). > Since they were the two who were told by Lucius to go through the > door that Harry, Hermione, and Neville were hiding behind (I think). > Hickengruendler: There is a very excellent essay about this on the HP-Lexicon, where the Baby Head Death Eater is narrowed down to three possibilities, and Avery was one of them. But it probably wasn't MacNair, since MacNair appeared later in the battle again. Neville stabbed Hermione's wand in his eyes, when he nearly killed Harry. Of course it is possible that the other Death Eaters found him and were able to redo the damage. But I somehow doubt it, later there were only 10 of 12 Death Eaters in the Death room. One of them missing was Nott, and the other probably the Babyhead. From mgrantwich at yahoo.com Sat Nov 20 12:26:12 2004 From: mgrantwich at yahoo.com (Magda Grantwich) Date: Sat, 20 Nov 2004 04:26:12 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: The length of the Pensieve Scene In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041120122612.77358.qmail@web53108.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 118246 --- curlyhornedsnorkack wrote: > But it is possible they are annoyed with Snape for a > specific reason. What was James supposed to say to Lily about the > reason (I suspect) James was punishing Snape? "Snape's trying to > expose our > friend" wouldn't do, because it might set tongues waggling among > other > students? Or does James give a no-good-reason, such as "Because he > exists" (OOTP) to stop inquiries flat? Yes, but... ...if that is the case, why didn't Remus and Sirius tell Harry that when he confronted them through the fireplace? If there were any reason whatsoever that would have in some way explained James' actions that day, they would have told Harry because their prime concern at that moment was his feelings. Instead they tell him that people are idiots at 15 ("I'm 15!" - love that line) and that they were sometimes arrogant birks, and Remus says that he never told them "to lay off Snape", that they were "out of order" (which is a funny pun, if you think of it: order/Order). There's nothing in their discussion to indicate that Snape was trying to do anything to them. Also I'm not clear on how Snape was following the Marauders when it was him who left the hall first and the Marauders followed him. As for exposing Remus' secret: the person who did that was Sirius Black, one of his closest friends, and that apparently happened in the next school year, according to canon. James was not punishing Snape - he was providing amusement for Sirius because he was bored ("'I'm not proud of it,' Sirius said quickly.") Sirius' claim that Snape was sneaking around trying to get them expelled (and so deserved whatever happened during the Prank) takes on some context after the Pensieve episode. Sirius is maddenly imprecise about when Snape started trying to get them expelled - notice that it doesn't come up in his description of James and Snape to Harry. If he tried to get them expelled after what we see in the pensieve, I would find it hard to condemn Snape for that. Magda __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From carolynwhite2 at aol.com Sat Nov 20 12:27:30 2004 From: carolynwhite2 at aol.com (carolynwhite2) Date: Sat, 20 Nov 2004 12:27:30 -0000 Subject: The Art of Love according to Albus Dumbledore (was:Harry left at the Dursleys) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118247 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "iris_ft" wrote: > Maybe Dumbledore wasn't there when the Dursleys were abusing Harry. > But when the boy really needs him, i.e., when he faces plainly for > the first time the hardest trial, the trial of his burning human > consciousness, he is with him. He doesn't do Harry's work. But he is > there to tell him it's possible. That's what a true master has to > do, before the disciple becomes a master himself. > "I have watched you more closely than you can have imagined", > Dumbledore says before telling Harry the truth. > In other words: "I was there before you, I've passed through the > same trials; and for that reason, I'm always with you, though you > don't realize." > These are the words of the Alchemist considering his work, his > disciple; but also of the tragic characters (fictional or not) > moving along with us since the beginning of human history. > > Just the way I see it, of course, > > Amicalement, > > Iris Carolyn: You are a wonderful exponent of the alchemical explanation of HP, Iris. You have me nearly persuaded every time... But consider this. Could it be that the trial that Dumbledore understands so well is not so much his own, personal experiences, but that of a previous failure with Tom Riddle ? I keep banging on about this, I know, but it really was no accident that the first wand with Fawkes' feather was not only made available for selection, but then found such an affinity with Tom. He clearly was a very powerful wizard child, that later went through 'many dangerous transformations'. His first quest in PS/SS was, interestingly, for the Philosopher's Stone, not Harry. He was taught by DD at school, and undoubtedly found out what DD had been working on with Flamel. I submit that Dumbledore failed with Tom, big time ('it's our choices'). It's that pain he is re-living, and which makes him take such a cool, clinical attitude to Harry. Not only does he have the detachment brought by great age, but probably he is still unsure whether this second child might go off the rails, and therefore by instinct now, trusts no one, and keeps most of his plans to himself. Carolyn From mgrantwich at yahoo.com Sat Nov 20 13:11:13 2004 From: mgrantwich at yahoo.com (Magda Grantwich) Date: Sat, 20 Nov 2004 05:11:13 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Harry left at the Dursleys (Was Re: Plot in OotP) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041120131113.403.qmail@web53104.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 118248 --- dumbledore11214 wrote: > I don't understand what did you mean by "Dumbledore recognising > that they are mean to Harry, does not equal allowing them to be > mean to Harry?" [snip] > I am very confused, sorry. Well, I'm confused by your confusion. Dumbledore knows that the Dursleys are jerks and he knows that they'll probably be jerky to Harry. But being with the Dursleys is required under the protection spell and there's nothing Dumbledore can do about that. So he has to take the bad (Dursleys being jerks) with the good (Harry being protected). Dumbledore is not all-powerful and can't force people to be nice. In Dumbledore's explanation at the end of OOTP, he tells Harry that Petunia sealed the spell by accepting Harry into her home and Harry protests that she hates him, resents him, etc. Dumbledore agrees that she did it bitterly, resentfully, etc. but the point is that she did do it, even if her attitude sucked big time. Some people have suggested that he placed some kind of spell on Petunia or blackmailed her into accepting Harry. I don't think so because her voluntary acceptance of Harry was the key to sealing the spell. He also indicates that he kept Harry under observation, obviously partly through Mrs. Figg and less obviously through some other method. So he did put some method of monitoring the situation in place so that Harry had some degree of oversight. All of the above is canon and we don't know anymore - yet. I prefer to wait until the end of book 7 with whatever revelations we find out between now and then to determine whether Dumbledore could have done more to change the Dursleys' treatment of Harry. Personally I don't think he had much leverage. Once they got over their shock, I think the Dursleys insisted that the WW keep away from them, and Vernon says in PS/SS that they "swore when we took him in we'd put a stop to that rubbish" which might imply that they actually made it a condition of keeping him. Magda __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Meet the all-new My Yahoo! - Try it today! http://my.yahoo.com From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com Sat Nov 20 14:46:00 2004 From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (Barry Arrowsmith) Date: Sat, 20 Nov 2004 14:46:00 +0000 Subject: Unfortunate!Peter Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118249 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Sharon" wrote: > I haven't posted before, so forgive any typographical errors I might make. I have been reading up on recent posts, however, with much interest, and look forward to some good Peter discussion, which I haven't had in some time. > Kneasy: Welcome - and particularly so since you've obviously been thinking about Peter much more critically and for much longer than I have. I only wrote the damn post as a sort of intellectual exercise to see if it was possible to concoct some sort of rationale or defence of Peter. That said, it seems there are fans out there that don't feel entirely content with the picture of Peter that we've seen up to now, mostly because they feel that it's incomplete. And that, as we all appreciate, is likely to cause an itch in the "what if" gland resulting in towering edifices of speculation based on minute snippets of canon. Lovely! I've taken the liberty of using this post to comment on points raised in your other post of yesterday. Lotsa snips. > Azriona: Kneasy, I have not always believed that Peter was a spy for Dumbledore, but over the last year I have come to believe it. I cannot believe that DD, knowing the odds and knowing his resources, would have not had more than one spy in place. And I cannot believe that a man who would willingly place an 11-, 12- and 13- year old boy in mortal danger would think that the odds of having a single spy would be enough upon which to wage a war. > Kneasy: I agree. DD as war leader cannot be limited to the hands-off, gentle old duffer emoting all over his study at the end of OoP. Many posters have posited (myself included) Puppetmaster!DD, the pragmatic and if necessary cold strategist willing to do what is necessary to win. Who is more important in the defeat of Voldy? Harry or James and Lily? As in chess (clue in PS/SS?) sacrifices may be unavoidable. If he's any good he'll cover as many options as possible - including the possibility that one of his own spies is blown or turned - Snape giving evidence at the DE trials is an example. He'll want somebody else in there. And unconsidered, ineffectual Peter would attract less suspicion than most. > Azriona: I can't trust that Pensieve. We forget that we are seeing Peter through *Snape's* eyes, and I think most would agree that as far as the Marauders are concerned, Snape is hardly an impartial judge. We see James and Co. not as the boys they were, but as the boys they were *to Snape*. > Kneasy: I'm not so sure about that. Both of the Pensieve scenes we've viewed so far present the action as it would be seen by a disinterested observer able (unlike Snape) to monitor conversations he could not possibly hear in reality. Is it the objective truth or is it an extrapolation based on how Snape feels or what he knows about the Marauders? Now what is interesting is that there appear to be two Pensieve modes. One when Harry immerses himself and sees the scene in it's entirety (or so we think) and the restricted mode when DD tickles the surface with his wand and only the individual he's interested in (Sybill for example) appears. Very convenient, for DD and JKR both. Because it occurs to me that if we could dive in we'd find out who the eavesdropper was. > Azriona: I would argue that Peter *was* essential. (If for no other reason than as JKR's plot device.) What Peter provided the rest of the boys changes depending on who you're talking to - but Peter seems to have provided the encouragement James and Sirius needed in order to go ahead with their plans - whether those plans involved Snivellus' underwear or going to the kitchens to steal food. Or, as you also claim, to run to DD to tell him about The Prank. No, we don't know Peter's role in the Prank. We don't know a whole lot about the Prank - and the biggest clue that we don't know a lot is that JKR herself has said we're going to learn about it. Now, I don't know about you, but before she said that I thought the whole Prank issue was pretty much covered, way back in PoA. And now there's apparently *more* to know? Why do I have the feeling that the more to know deals with Peter's role in the entire sordid affair? > Kneasy: Another role for Peter? Agent provocateur? The possibility depends on how far back DD's plans were laid, whether he knew or foresaw events (another Prophecy or two perhaps?) that would culminate in Harry vs. Voldy. The possibility that pieces were moved around the board that far back would require a seriously paranoid mind. I like it. I'll put it on my list. Plus it's congruent with the proposition that the Voldy wars I & II are just the latest episodes in a much longer struggle. But by far the most asked question about the 'Prank' doesn't involve Peter; it's why the hell would Snape ask Sirius what was going on with Lupin and believe the answer? Unless this was the first clash between Snape and the Marauders it doesn't make sense. And somehow I don't think it was the first clash. The apparent absence of Peter is unexpected if the Marauders were as tight as we believe. Full moon has arrived, Lupin has loped off to the Shack, just wait for things to quieten down and the Marauders will be romping round the countryside. Yet there seems to be a gap in the ranks. Where's Peter? Good question - unless it happened in the interregnum between James and Sirius mastering the Animagus spell and Peter catching up with them - or indeed in the early years before any of them became animagi. Oh, for a solid time-frame! > Azriona: Ugh. I think it's more interesting that Moody, when presenting the photograph to Harry, doesn't actually mention Peter's name. Here he is, pointing out all these people in the photo who Harry's never heard of, much less *met*, and then we run into Peter Pettigrew, who of course Moody will know that Harry knows fairly well. I mean, we don't even get a "Oh, and there's that really awful Peter Pettigrew, I should just scratch his darn-ed face from the photo." Something there, I tells you. > Kneasy: Good point. Moody, battered old Auror, been there, done that, got the wooden leg, outspoken, inflexible in his views, reminiscing for once, and not a single word about Peter. Very odd. I suspect that on occasion JKR uses Moody as a pointer for the reader - his "there's something funny about the Potter kid.." being an obvious example. But in this instance it's his silence that's deafening. A suspicious mind might wonder why Moody showed Harry the photograph in the first place. Is Moody dropping hints to Harry, or is JKR dropping hints to us? Just why is Peter sitting between James and Lily? Why is Sirius on the other side of the group? Is Peter closer to them than Sirius socially as well as positionally? All it needs now is for Pettigrews middle name to be Harry and we've got a right box of birds on our hands. > Azriona: I don't think you're wrong. And in fact, I think you're more right than you might know. Dumbledore never once questions the story about Peter being SK - he never once degrades Peter in front of Harry - and he never once calls him "Wormtail." DD gives Peter every inch of respect there is to give, and even has some interest in his whereabouts - going as far as to interupt Harry in GoF about what Peter was doing during the cemetary scene. Why? Why does DD show such interest in Peter? > Kneasy: Could be significant, though to be fair he never seems to rubbish anyone, not Peter, not Tom, not Voldy. But asking specifically after the actions/reactions of Peter rather than say, Malfoy, does add extra piquancy. Though I've got an interest in what he's up to myself. I voted on JKR's site for an answer to where Peter had been during OoP. I still wonder. > Azriona: Well...I don't know that Peter is paying penance. What does he have to pay penance for, exactly? (Okay, death of James & Lily, blah blah blah.) I should think that the general hatred of the world and his best friends would take care of that. I rather think that Peter has been living for the previous 12 years as a rat and continues to work with Voldie because he is A GOOD SPY. He's still under cover. > Kneasy: I admit that penance was a stab in the dark - I have this thing about motivations and Peter as presented does not seem the type to volunteer for hazardous duty. He'd need a strong reason, one were the alternative was worse. It's possible that what we'll get is not what we see now, but for the moment I prefer to think that he was shoved rather than he jumped. More BANG. And it would need one hell of a motivation for him to keep on going now that things are getting really nasty. > Azriona: Maybe. When the Marauders are split up between the Houses, Peter (with very few exceptions) goes to Hufflepuff - it's certainly the house other than Gryffindor that seems to fit him best. But for all that, there was a *reason* that the Hat put him in Gryffindor with Remus and Sirius (because James had not been sorted by the time Peter took the stool). Maybe because his loyalty to those two boys could not be questioned, or because his bravery was largely dependant upon them? > Kneasy: There are those of us who suspect that the Hat was fixed, or broke it's own programming, not just once but twice producing a generational parallel between the Marauders and the Trio plus Neville. During times of crises (according to Nearly Headless Nick) it makes appeals for a joining of the Houses. What better times than Voldy I & II? Though exactly what it hopes to achieve by shuffling students around is a bit more problematical to figure out. Yes, loyalty is a supposed attribute of Huffs; but loyalty to whom? Would Peter focus on loyalty to James, to the Marauders as a group, to DD, to the 'good' side, or what? It'd help if we had some Pettigrew background - pureblood? family victims of Voldy? It's that lack of credible motivation again. > > Juli: > > Then WHY would DD want LV to return? > Azriona: Because if DD waits for Harry to grow up and become a man, the series will be longer than 7 books and JKR will go the way of Robert Jordan's Wheel of Time series, and no one really wants that. > Kneasy: The Prophecy - or more likely Prophecies, I'd think. They may be self-fulfilling but DD needs some sort of guide to help him through the maze of possible actions and outcomes. If Seers turn up and offer a possible route map he'd jump at it. I know I would. From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Sat Nov 20 16:33:11 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Sat, 20 Nov 2004 16:33:11 -0000 Subject: Old F.A.O. poll on JKR website Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118250 Hmm. I just went to JKR's website to check for updates and did not find anything new yet. But I reread the answer about Dumbledore's communication with Petunia and have a question. JKR says that this time two out of three questions had interesting answers, right? We discussed the possible answers to all three in depth earlier . What about the first F.A.O poll? Do you think that situation was the same, namely two out of three questions also had interesting answers? We had Mark Evans' fiasco, but two other questions were whether Sirius Black is really dead and whether Snape is Perseus Evans. Do you think we may have gotten an "interesting" answers to BOTH of them? From dontask2much at yahoo.com Sat Nov 20 17:04:43 2004 From: dontask2much at yahoo.com (charme) Date: Sat, 20 Nov 2004 12:04:43 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Unfortunate!Peter References: Message-ID: <003701c4cf23$08bc7530$6701a8c0@MITRE.ORG> No: HPFGUIDX 118251 From: "Barry Arrowsmith" > A major problem is that there's so little in canon that is objective > and untainted by the opinions or prejudices of others. Still, we'll see > what we can do with what we have. charme: First, I have to say I love your posts, Kneasy. Most of the time I read them and say, "the man has a good point and thinks way out of the box." This time though, I have a different opinion and hope that you'll accept it as such. :) > The earliest images we have of him are in the Pensieve memory. It is > not a comfortable picture. Although generally classed as one of the > Marauders, he's obviously the odd one out. To James he's an > appreciative audience, ready to admire and perhaps hero worship > whenever James feels like putting on a performance. To Sirius he's a > nothing, a hanger-on to be belittled; to Lupin - what? We don't really > know, Lupin acts as if he wasn't there. > > So why did they spend so much time and trouble encouraging him to > master the Animagus spell? Why did they tolerate him, what did they > need him for? "Ah," some will say "it's because as a rat he could > immobilise the Whomping Willow, that's why." > "Oh, yes," says I "and how did they know he'd be a rat?" Because they > couldn't know, not in advance. Besides, I'm not so sure that the tree > was all that massive then and even in PoA Harry et al manage quite > nicely with a broken branch. Peter was not essential, yet they > persisted for years. Why? charme: There is a quote from Petunia which may apply here. In OoP, Petunia refers to that "awful boy" telling Lily about Azkaban and the Dementors. I know a lot of people believe that's referring to Snape, but I believe it's referring to Peter. There's one reason perhaps why James would tolerate him, along with your point out Lupin's attitude: have you ever had a cousin, little brother, or other likewise family member who trailed after you in school? It's just a thought, and it's a thought based on Ron's observation in CoS that most pureblood wizards are related in some way, and I suppose that might apply to half bloods too? I also would like to say that James and Sirius were reportedly the "brightest and the best' at school, and helping Peter transform would have been a challenge they couldn't have passed up, even if he was a "nonessential." > Though on second thoughts, there is a place for him in that episode. > Who told DD? I doubt Sevvy was calm and collected enough to gather his > robes around him, stalk off to his House-master and request an > interview with the Dumbledore about a hidden werewolf. He'd be ready to > shout it from the roof-tops, tell anyone who'd listen - but he didn't. > I'd think that only the timely arrival of someone like DD would prevent > that. So, it's either his much-vaunted omniscience (which seems very > patchy at other times, you must admit) or somebody told him. Could very > well have been Peter. charme: I think it was James who told DD about the incident in the Shrieking Shack after he'd saved Snape. Furthermore, I think at the end of PoA, Snape is furious Sirius is missing and flips out reminding DD that Sirius tried to kill him (re: Whomping Willow incident). This in my mind means at some point in the past, DD and Snape have discussed this before. > If so, then maybe we have a role for Peter. James and Sirius - > tear-aways; Lupin - made a prefect to try and keep them in check > (unsuccessfully); Peter - informer; he tells DD just what they're up > to. You don't really believe DD didn't know about them being animagi, > do you? Perhaps Peter is getting some basic training in spying. charme: If that's the case, Peter would have told DD about them becoming animagi and he didn't. DD professes not to know about in PoA and seems rather impressed they *did* keep it from him. And yes, I do believe they did keep it from him. Peter is weak, and Sirius points out that Peter migrates to whatever wizard is the strongest for protection. Peter himself admits there was nothing to be gained by refusing LV. One week it could be James, another Sirius, another LV. That's not "spy" material, IMO that's weakness. > > Then there's Moody's photograph. There's Peter, sitting between James > and Lily. Lots of fans have wondered about this; is it significant? Was > there unrequited affection (or even requited affection) between > James/Peter or between Lily/Peter? Why are James and Lily sitting > apart? Not being romantically inclined I've never read much into it, > but believe you me, others have. Again, I think Peter had a friendship with both Lily and James, and hero/heroine worship for both, too. I think Peter gave the impression of being vulnerable and weak, so they felt a responsibility to protect him and Sirius alludes to this in his responses to him in the Shrieking Shack in PoA. > There's just a couple of points I want to consider on the GH episode: > 1. I think there's a hole in the SK set-up. Remember in OoP Harry is > given the GP address (presumably written by DD) - it is not addressed > to him and once he has read it, Moody burns it. This leaves one with > the impression that *anyone* reading that slip of paper could find > No.12 GP. This makes tying down who knew what and when about GH much > more iffy. For a start, it'd wouldn't be necessary to have a meeting to > pass on the address, nor would the SK know if an address slip hadn't > been burned but had been passed on to someone who was not a friend of > the Potters. charme: I don't know that we have enough information about SK's and charms to come to a conclusion: JKR has said in her interviews that she had to define the boundaries and rules of magic in the wizard community so she could have a viable and accurate way to construct the plots and storyline. Since we don't know the particulars "yet", I can't necessarily agree that James and Lily wouldn't have met with Peter directly to establish him as the SK. > > 2. Scabbers vanishes into the sewers. Right. Then what? Where does he > go? Who does he see? Want a suggestion? > OK - Dumbledore. Neither the DEs nor the MoM people believe he's > alive. Who's left? DD. It's maybe my memory, but unlike just about all > the adults in the books I can't remember DD ever saying or hinting or > commenting in PoA that he believed Peter was dead. If I'm wrong I'm > sure someone will correct me. charme: How about another suggestion or two? Lucius Malfoy or even Fudge, as Fudge was the first person on the scene after Peter's suppposed demise. I could also think of others Peter could have gone to, so DD isn't the only one. And you're right, DD doesn't say anything about if Peter's dead or not - he may suspect he isn't and that Peter had something to do with the Potter's demise but can't PROVE it. If you look at the way he talks about Sirius' conviction in PoA, he states that he has no means to show other wizards the truth of a situation or go against the MoM even after Hermione and Harry tell him Sirius is innocent. > > One of the FAQs that crops up regularly is Scabbers' association with > the Weasleys. How long has he been there, along with musing on how a > long-lived non-magical rat was accepted as a pet at Hogwarts for years > and no-one so much as blinked. What was Peter likely to know about the > Weasleys? Damn all, I should think. Neither Molly nor Arthur appear on > Moody's photograph and so probably weren't in the Order in the first > Voldy War, and they were at school years before him and their kids were > years after him. charme: Of your whole post, this is the one paragraph that interests me the most. We have never been told "why" Molly and Arthur weren't on the photo when so many others were, plus we're left to wonder how Peter got to Percy and the Weasleys as a pet. > > Then there's the general acceptance of Peter spending 12 years as a rat > and never, so far as we can tell, having a tea-break and stretching > his legs. Add to this the fact that at the Shrieking Shack it took two > wizards wielding two wands simultaneously to switch him back to human > form and I begin to suspect that Peter has been spelled. He might not > even be in animagus form at all, he could have been transfigured. And > who's the Transfiguration Supremo? DD. Would being transfigured count > as being chained? > There's not much evidence (before SS) that Scabbers shows any sign of > human intelligence - except perhaps once, when he bites Goyle. That is > interesting in itself - why would a Voldy supporter go out of his way > to attack a Slytherin? But to all intents and purposes he acts just as > a rat should. If he was in animagus form I'd have thought Crookshannks > would have forced him out of it. Being chewed up as moggy appetiser is > just as bad and much more immediate than being chased by DEs. charme: How about Peter was "stuck"? In canon, the point is made that specifically that the Animagi state can be dangerous and that's why the Ministry, and Hogwarts, are so sensitive to transformations like it. We don't have those "rules" of the wizarding world so to speak, so we don't know what happens to a wizard who retains his Animagus state for an extended period of time. Lupin in PoA states that James and Sirius needed to give Peter all the help they could since he wasn't as good at it as all the rest of them, which leads me to believe that perhaps Peter got himself into an Animagus state that might have been particularly difficult for him to overcome. > > > Another oddity; when Scabbers runs away (when Ron thinks Crookshanks > has eaten him), where does he hide? Hagrid's Hut. Hagrid has given me > pause to wonder over the years. I've never been quite sure how deep in > DD's confidence he is. Just how much does he know, just how many little > errands has he run for DD? This is the wizard who states "..nobody > went bad 'cept they was Slytherin" yet rubbishes Black (a Gryffindor) > for betraying James and Lily. Does not compute. Now if Harry could > corner Hagrid and start asking some pointed questions we might get to > the bottom of this. charme: I don't think this is the mystery you do. Hagrid is overwhelming a lover of animals and if he saw a rat, he wouldn't kill it, he'd feed it and take care of it. In other words, the similiarity there exists with Peter again being protected by the "biggest and strongest," just in a different sense. > > No, I think DD placed Scabbers with the Weasleys. It was a large enough > family that sooner or later Scabbers would turn up at Hogwarts while > Harry was there. And Harry is important, both to DD and to Peter. > > A few weeks ago I complained that the description of Peter's escape > after the SS debacle had been cut short. we're told he ran away - but > not the direction. The natural assumption is that it'd be towards the > Forest. But it'd be a turn up for the books if he hadn't, if he'd run > towards the school instead. I'm sure DD would have been fascinated by > what he could tell him. > > Peter is supposed to be weak, pathetic, ineffectual. Now compare him > to the big, brave DEs. They cower before Voldy. Peter disagrees with > him, tries to get him to change his mind about using Harry Potter for > his scheme while they're at the Riddle House. charme: Actually, my natural assumption was Peter fleeing toward Hogwarts, but not to DD. Rather, I would think the rat went down the pipes: remember, Peter also knows about the Marauders Map and all the ways out of Hogwarts. I disagree that Peter doesn't cower before Voldy (he cringes when Sirius refers to Voldemort in the Shrieking Shack,) however you're right that he does try to change Voldy's mind in the Riddle House. I think this is because he *knows* if he has to try to go after Harry in any way for Voldy, there's a distinct possibility his old friends will kill him. He probably also doesn't want a repeat of the last time LV went after Harry: that little incident caused Peter to be hunted by DE's as a double crosser. Plus there's the fact that "life debt" thing you don't subscribe to - but I'll get to that later in my responses. > > I think Peter works for DD - and probably has for a long time. > > A few days ago I wrote pointing out that Peter had never been > 'chained', that he could leave at any time. I also hinted that there > might be an alternative explanation. Ready? > > I think Peter is/has been paying penance, with the encouragement of DD, > for some act of foolishness, naivety or stupidity that contributed to > the deaths of the Potters. He's DD's eyes and ears in the Voldy camp > and maybe the final safety net if Harry gets into a really sticky > spot. Forget all this 'life debt' guff (a phrase invented by fans > incidentally and not in canon). Peter will eventually help Harry and/or > turn on Voldy for reasons that have little to do with the Shrieking > Shack episode. He may already have done so. > > Remember the graveyard, the bit where Harry escapes? Do you really > think that one unaimed Impedimenta! spell thrown over his shoulder > could have discommoded that many DEs, spread in a circle, all at once? charme: I think Peter is the ultimate "flip flopper." In PoA, he admits he did tell LV where the Potters were, and refers to LV's powers and that LV would kill him had he not done as he was told. He does not deny he was spying for LV for a full year before James and Lily were killed. If that's not bad enough, Peter uses the logic that LV was taking over everywhere, what was to be gained by refusing him? I think there's only 2 options here, either Peter started out with the idea of spying for the Order and got sucked in or he got recruited by LV and his followers and couldn't resist. I don't think he's DD's eyes and ears any longer, though. He's sealed his fate by the choices he made. I also agree that while the actual phrase "life debt" is not in canon, it IS in canon in concept through DD's words to Harry at the end of PoA in Lupin's office. He specifically says the Pettigrew owes his life to Harry, and that a certain bond is created when one wizard saves another. > > "Ah," you'll say, "but he killed Cedric. He must be ESE" > Did he? Read the passage again. The cloaked figure (Peter) is carrying > something in his arms (plural). It's only after Cedric has been killed > that he puts down the bundle (Voldy) and lights his wand. And he's > scared, trembling so much he can hardly tie knots in a rope. It's been > proposed in the past that there was someone else in that graveyard - > the most common suspects being Sirius, Lupin or Bagman. What is sure is > that the passage does not say that the AK came from Peter. > charme: While it true it's not explicitly stated that Peter killed Cedric with LV's wand, it's alluded to by the mere fact that Cedric comes out of LV's wand during the graveyard duel. The line you mention where the cloaked man puts down the bundle and lights the wand is written in past tense with what Harry observed: he *had* put down the bundle and lit his wand, which means to me it was done and Harry hadn't seen him do it, he just noted the result. Peter's fumbling around because he *knows* going to have to cut off his hand and because he's just killed a kid intentionally - the Muggles that were killed when Sirius found him after the Potters were snuffed at GH fell because of the explosion Peter created with LV's wand to get away. In other words, he didn't aim an AK at them and specifically intend to kill them. He's now crossed that line - the line he avoided by screwing it up with Barty Crouch, Sr earlier in GoF. He's full fledged on the dark side now if you look at it that way, isn't he? > As a final indicator there's his name, and we all appreciate how JKR > likes fitting names to characters. Pettigrew - small of stature, > nothing special there; but Peter - the rock, that's something else. charme: "Peter" is also JKR's father's name. Interesting, isn't it? From coriolan_cmc at hotmail.com Sat Nov 20 17:03:43 2004 From: coriolan_cmc at hotmail.com (Caius Marcius) Date: Sat, 20 Nov 2004 17:03:43 -0000 Subject: FILK: The Smart Stuff Suite Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118252 The Smart Stuff Suite (OOP, Chap. 31) Based on The VeggieTales' Stuff-Mart Suite A clip can be heard here: http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/B00009L53N/qid=1100967399/sr=2- 2/ref=pd_ka_b_2_2/002-6432895-2906446 lyrics may be found here: http://www.bigidea.com/music/veggietunes/havewegot_lyrics08.htm Dedicated, of course, to Ginger THE SCENE: A small chamber beside the Great Hall. HERMIONE meets with a CHORUS OF EXAMINERS (including PROFS. MARCHBANKS AND TOSTY) as she begins her practical examination for her OWLs. DAPHNE GREENGRASS, who is to follow HERMIONE'S tough act, watches the proceedings glumly. The opening music is very formal and recitative-like: CHROUS OF EXAMINERS: Allow us to introduce ourselves, We're testers, of things from Charms to vowels Some say we're the most insightful bunch of fellows, Ever sent here to score OWLs! And if you have studied your books, Young lady with bushy-haired looks, We'd like to take a minute or two To determine your future for you. We want to see your smart stuff Your enormous erudition With some skill in composition HERMIONE(spoken): Well, I ... EXAMINERS: And as evaluators of the smart stuff, We'll know if you have the right stuff. HERMIONE (spoken): Oh yes, yes, why I was just saying that ... MARCHBANKS: I pray that you have studied long, my dear, And that you have no trepidation of this journey. The minimal acceptable grade is an "A," It's either that, or drive with Stan and Ernie. EXAMINERS: We want to see your smart stuff A magic test you might fail If you skimp too much on details. So as a Fifth-Year who knows some smart stuff, Get ready to show us your stuff. (The music abruptly switches to a techno-rock beat) HERMIONE: Check it out! Check it out! EXAMINERS: If you want to turn time HERMIONE: I'm sublime! EXAMINERS: If you need to villains vex HERMIONE: I've got a hex! EXAMINERS:: A magic number chart? HERMIONE: Known by heart! Here's a patron like an otter That I learned from Harry Potter And a potion for a trance state With some runes for me to translate And what goblins in duress say In my Ulric Oddball essay Plus a coin all bright and goldy Through a spell I swiped from Voldy HERMIONE & EXAMINERS: Voldy! Voldy! Voldy-Morty-Voldy Here we go Voldy, Come on! EXAMINERS: Can you liberate an elf? ... HERMIONE: By myself! EXAMINERS: A pint of Polyjuice? HERMIONE: Turn me loose! EXAMINERS (displaying Hogwarts ? A History): Memorize this book? HERMIONE: With one look! I'll re-start my wand a-wavin' With a spell to silence ravens Change a match into a needle, Make a jar to capture beetles Tell a hedgehog from a knarl, Force a boggart not to snarl Plus a charm for drying glasses And my work in flying classes HERMIONE & EXAMINERS: Classes! Classes! Classy classic classes! Here we go classes, Come on! (the music returns to its previous formality) TOSTY: Though you'll have to wait until July To find out if you did qualify. You may wait with knocking of knees To learn if you've earned "Os" or "Ts" EXAMINERS: Happy are they who have smart stuff. That's because they know more stuff. HERMIONE I really ought to not delve. But I think I scored One-Twelve MARCHBANKS (spoken, to Hermione): Yes, you got it! DAPHNE GREENGRASS (spoken, sighing): Oh, great! EXAMINERS (music): Happy are they who have smart stuff. That's because they won't ... get... stuffed .. - CMC HARRY POTTER FILKS http://home.att.net/~coriolan/hpfilks.htm From iris_ft at yahoo.fr Sat Nov 20 17:38:04 2004 From: iris_ft at yahoo.fr (iris_ft) Date: Sat, 20 Nov 2004 17:38:04 -0000 Subject: The Art of Love according to Albus Dumbledore (was:Harry left at the Dursleys) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118253 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "carolynwhite2" wrote: > > But consider this. Could it be that the trial that Dumbledore > understands so well is not so much his own, personal experiences, but > that of a previous failure with Tom Riddle ? > > I keep banging on about this, I know, but it really was no accident > that the first wand with Fawkes' feather was not only made available > for selection, but then found such an affinity with Tom. He clearly > was a very powerful wizard child, that later went through 'many > dangerous transformations'. His first quest in PS/SS was, > interestingly, for the Philosopher's Stone, not Harry. He was taught > by DD at school, and undoubtedly found out what DD had been working > on with Flamel. > > I submit that Dumbledore failed with Tom, big time ('it's our > choices'). It's that pain he is re-living, and which makes him take > such a cool, clinical attitude to Harry. Not only does he have the > detachment brought by great age, but probably he is still unsure > whether this second child might go off the rails, and therefore by > instinct now, trusts no one, and keeps most of his plans to himself. > > Carolyn I agree globally. As you do, I believe that Tom Riddle was part of Dumbledore's intent to transfigure the wizard world. Tom tells Harry in CoS that Dumbledore was keeping an eye on him, and to me it sounds like what Harry is told in the "Lost prophecy" chapter. And it's true, Tom Riddle, the despised and rejected orphan, had the potential to become Dumbledore's Materia Prima. But I'm not sure Dumbledore failed with him, because he didn't see him as a potential "human Philosopher's Stone". I tend to consider he rather recognized Tom's potential to become the one who would cause such a pain to the wizard world that it would be necessary to provide it with a human Philosopher's Stone (Harry) able to heal it. He probably detected Tom's evil potential, tried to counter it, and finally failed, because letting Tom make his own choices was a mistake. However I don't think he considered him the way he considers Harry. He probably tried to help him, he certainly loved him, or at least, he felt compassion towards him. He made a mistake trusting him too much. We can forgive him, because it all came from a noble sentiment. Of course, there's another possibility: Dumbledore knew what would happen, but he didn't do anything to counter it, in order to reach his goal and transfigure the wizard society. It's a possibility we can't ignore, but I confess that I feel very uncomfortable when I consider it, even trying to do it from "an alchemical point of view", because playing with minerals is one thing, but playing with a whole society is another one. You can't pretend you work for the good of people when it implies terror and violence, torture and murder. Unless Dumbledore turns out to be actually a heartless cynical manipulator (but I don't think he is) he surely wouldn't have been ready to make the society he was living in pay such a terrible cost. Dumbledore doesn't seem to be the kind of man able to misuse the power he has been given. He doesn't want to become Minister, and in OotP, he's ready to renounce every honorific title he has been given. Note by the way that the only thing that would bother him would be if they cancel his Chocolate Frog card. It's precisely the element that makes the connection between him and Alchemy. He couldn't tell better who he is actually. And as an alchemist, he doesn't consider he's there to rule, but to serve. Dumbledore is Hogwarts headmaster, i.e. the "humble door" welcoming every student who wants to learn and improve. There's something wrong with the wizard world, maybe he's partly responsible for what happened, but it was certainly unintentional. Now, he tries to do his best to correct the mistake, and unfortunately, the solution is probably lying in the heart of a child. May as it be, and though it is uncomfortable, it is there: if Harry has to become a human Philosopher's Stone, then Tom Riddle/Voldemort has a necessary part to play in the process. It is said that the central operation of the "Art of Love" is the union of the contraries. It is also said that this union wouldn't be possible without the idea of analogy. In other words, the opposites unite because they come actually from the same root, because "Everything is in everything". And we can't deny it, we find several allusions to that (VERY complicated) notion in the series: ?in CoS, Tom Riddle underlines the similitude between Harry and him ?there's "a bit of Voldemort" inside Harry, and there's Harry's blood in Voldemort's veins. ?Even the two enigmatic texts we find in the series refer to analogy. Snape's puzzle in PS/SS says: "Second, different are those who stand at either end, But if you would move onwards, neither is your friend;" And also: "Fourth, the second left and the second on the right Are twins once you taste them, though different at first sight." ?There's also the lost prophecy, saying "the Dark Lord will mark him as an equal". These elements are probably here on a deliberate purpose. Alchemy says the opposites combine and give birth to each other, because they come from the same root. That's what Harry and Voldemort do. Voldemort went after Harry because he instinctively recognized himself in the boy. And Harry will probably have to admit he is like Voldemort if he wants to fulfil his destiny. It's not only esoteric, but also human. We do it without trying to produce a Philosopher's Stone. We do it when we become mature enough to recognize what our parents left inside us, though we are different from them. We do it every time we admit the others are basically like us, though they don't share the same aspect, the same opinions, the same culture. The origin is the same, even if we are, like Harry and Voldemort, "in essence divided" (which depends for one part on our choices). Now, if we admit that Harry and Tom share the same root, the same origin, and probably not only from a spiritual perspective if we consider their physical similitude, we need to face another mystery: how is it possible? That's the matter with Alchemy (especially if you are still in the learning process), and with the Harry Potter series (same comment as before): you can't try to find an explanation without generating new questions. Will I tell you something new if I add it's at the same time frustrating and exciting? Just my opinion, but I also confess I feel rather confused, Amicalement, Iris PS: Carolyn, thanks for what you wrote at the beginning of your message. From naama_gat at hotmail.com Sat Nov 20 17:51:16 2004 From: naama_gat at hotmail.com (naamagatus) Date: Sat, 20 Nov 2004 17:51:16 -0000 Subject: The resolution of Snape (was Re: Harry mastering his emotions in In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118254 SSSusan: > So, unless something extraordinary is coming upon us, I don't imagine > Snape will be willing to do much changing. THUS [i.e., > consequentially, as a direct result of this], I do think Harry will > have to figure out what to do about that. If he will be required to > interact much with Snape in the next two years, then I think he'll > choose the "adult," "mature," "noble," "responsible," even > [gasp] "martyr-esque" [choose your fav or least fav term] tack of > saying, either literally or figuratively to Snape, "Yeah, whatever. > You go off on that, but I've got work to do." > > For me, it's almost a given that Snape will die. This has been quoted many times: Q: There's an important kind of redemptive pattern to Snape A: He, um, there's so much I wish I could say to you, and I can't because it would ruin. I promise you, whoever asked that question, can I just say to you that I'm slightly stunned that you've said that and you'll find out why I'm so stunned if you read Book 7. That's all I'm going to say. (found in www.quick-quote-quill.org, from a 1999 interview). Not that she's explicitly saying, "he's going to sacrifice himself to save Harry's life"... for me, though, it's as good as. I agree with Lupinlore that Harry learning to grin and bear it with Snape would be insipid [it, not you, SSSusan!]. I don't exactly know why - it sounds so healthy and well-adjusted. A bit too much, maybe? And also, and please forgive me if I'm being offensive here - a bit too American? At least the kind of American you see on "wholesome" family shows (of the kind they *do not* make on HBO, thank God). It just feels wrong to have that kind of resolution in the British, very English even, setting of HP. Naama From inkling108 at yahoo.com Sat Nov 20 18:06:38 2004 From: inkling108 at yahoo.com (inkling108) Date: Sat, 20 Nov 2004 18:06:38 -0000 Subject: June 2005 Release for HBP? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118255 Mugglenet.com quotes "someone in a position to know" as saying Scholastic plans to releae HBP in June 2005 with possible target dates June 11 and June 18. See mugglenet for more details. Cheers, Inkling From Vivamus at TaprootTech.com Sat Nov 20 10:19:24 2004 From: Vivamus at TaprootTech.com (Vivamus) Date: Sat, 20 Nov 2004 05:19:24 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Eagle owl wasRe: SNAPE the coward? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200411200520860.SM01080@DEVBOX> No: HPFGUIDX 118256 > Potioncat: > I assumed the Eagle Owl was the Malfoy family owl. But it could be > Draco's personal owl. What hits home now is that Lucius doesn't yet > know that LV is back. So why is it Malfoy's owl being used at all? > > I would assume that just any owl wouldn't work. LV must have some > sort of charm to stay hidden from the post. I think Barty JR sent > the owl...regardless. There is enough in GoF to indicate that Snape > didn't know about Crouch!Moody. Vivamus: Good thought about the particular owl having a charm allowing it to find LV; that hadn't occurred to me at all. On Lucius, though, I must be missing something. Why do you say he did not know then that LV was back? He said as much in the graveyard scene with LV in GoF, but it sounded like BS to me, to keep from being punished. I know, "you can't lie to LV," but we don't know if Lucius is a good Occlumens, either. From azriona at juno.com Sat Nov 20 12:41:26 2004 From: azriona at juno.com (Sharon) Date: Sat, 20 Nov 2004 12:41:26 -0000 Subject: Why Voldy came back when he did (was Re: Unfortunate!Peter) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118257 Juli: > > > Then WHY would DD want LV to return? Nora: That's a big problem for me, too. DD seems content, even focused, on > this delaying plan wherein Harry can get experience, grow up, and > some things can possibly be changed in the WW for greater > preparedness. It's completely and utterly in DD's best interest to > keep Voldemort down as long as he can--but Peter's escape and the > events of GoF really throw a wrench into everything there, and we > have a Harry facing Voldemort before it was really ideal. I can't > imagine any way that having Voldemort brought back earlier rather > than later is advantageous to Dumbledore's plan as stated at the end > of OotP. It's not that it's so much advantageous for Dumbledore to have Voldy brought back earlier than he would like - but that it's disadvantageous toward Voldy himself. The longer that DD gives Harry to grow up, learn more, and become more powerful, the longer he's also giving Voldemort to increase his power, his following, and his monetary funding. (It's all about cash flow.) And really, Harry's biggest asset is his *youth*. He doesn't know the proper rules of conduct in the WW, he doesn't know how to duel properly (unless you consider Lockhart to be a good teacher in that regard), and like a lot of young people, he doesn't know his own limitations. The older Harry gets, the more often he is likely to say, "Oh, I can't do that. It would be wrong." Whereas when he was young, of *course* he can go to the Third Corridor and check out the three-headed dog. Of *course* he can save his best friend from a rabid-appearing dog who's just disappeared under the Whomping Willow. And of *course* he stands a shot at actually throwing an Unforgiveable and making it *work*. He hasn't been told that he can't. But the older he gets - the more he realizes he can't do - the better chance that Voldy has to catch him in that moment of indecision. For that reason, I can understand why Dumbledore would be glad, in a way, that Voldy has returned before Harry's even started worrying about his OWLs. It's Harry's confidence and recklessness that Voldy really needs to fear. --azriona, who really just lives to play Devil's Advocate from time to time From bob.oliver at cox.net Sat Nov 20 15:36:29 2004 From: bob.oliver at cox.net (lupinlore) Date: Sat, 20 Nov 2004 15:36:29 -0000 Subject: The Art of Love according to Albus Dumbledore (was:Harry left at the Dursleys) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118258 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "carolynwhite2" wrote: > > I submit that Dumbledore failed with Tom, big time ('it's our > choices'). It's that pain he is re-living, and which makes him take > such a cool, clinical attitude to Harry. Not only does he have the > detachment brought by great age, but probably he is still unsure > whether this second child might go off the rails, and therefore by > instinct now, trusts no one, and keeps most of his plans to himself. > There is an attractiveness to this argument, and perhaps something to it, but I don't buy it in this context. Having failed with Tom the first time, Ddore would be incredibly foolish to embark on a similar deliberate experiment (i.e. child abuse) with Harry. Now, I will admit that I just don't buy the whole alchemical explanation. I think it is reading WAAAAAAAAY too much into the text. But that is my opinion and other people are, of course, entitled to theirs. But I think this is a point where it is the weakest, because here it (if I understand it correctly) requires Dumbledore to do something that is not only reprehensible, but foolish. Now, I grant that often mystical explanations make sense out of seemingly foolish actions. But this, I think, is a bridge too far. That is, of course, just my personal opinion. Lupinlore From azriona at juno.com Sat Nov 20 18:53:14 2004 From: azriona at juno.com (Sharon) Date: Sat, 20 Nov 2004 18:53:14 -0000 Subject: Unfortunate!Peter In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118259 As I'm still on moderated status, my posts have been a bit slow coming through, so I apologize for that first of all. Trust me, I've been waiting with bated breath for a continuance in the conversation! Thus, I'm also including some of charme's replies to Kneasy's original post in here. Kneasy: > I'm not so sure about that. Both of the Pensieve scenes we've > viewed so far present the action as it would be seen by a disinterested > observer able (unlike Snape) to monitor conversations he could not possibly > hear in reality. Is it the objective truth or is it an extrapolation > based on how Snape feels or what he knows about the Marauders? Disinterested? Are we sure? I've always felt that those Pensieve scenes, while they may show more than the person to whom the memory belongs, are still influenced by that person. I'm not saying that the scene is an extrapolation of diferent events - I mean, it really did happen - Sirius and Remus admit as much later on, and they certainly don't deny anything that happened. But Harry also didn't get a chance to tell either of them anything but the bare bones of what occured - nor did Sirius or Remus question him on any details (other than James and the Snitch). While the events themselves happened, I think, having resided for so long in Snape's memory, they would have taken on a certain...shall we say, Snapey flavor? The same with the other Pensieve scenes. We saw the Wizengamot trials from Dumbledore's viewpoint, with Dumbledore's specific memories. And the image of Bertha Jorkins that pops out is how *Dumbledore* saw her - and is certainly part of a larger memory which he chooses not to share. (Appropros to nothing, I always figured that the boy Bertha was talking about was Peter. But that's just me. And I half wonder that he wasn't the one eavesdropping on Trelawney's Lost Prophecy as well. But I am a great Peter Conspiratist, and tend to see him everywhere.) Kneasy: > The apparent absence of Peter is unexpected if the Marauders were > as tight as we believe. Full moon has arrived, Lupin has loped off to > the Shack, just wait for things to quieten down and the Marauders will > be romping round the countryside. Yet there seems to be a gap in the > ranks. Where's Peter? Good question - unless it happened in the > interregnum between James and Sirius mastering the Animagus spell > and Peter catching up with them - or indeed in the early years before > any of them became animagi. Oh, for a solid time-frame! Forgive me if I'm wrong, but didn't we have a solid time frame at one point? I could have sworn The Prank happened in their fifth year...but to go back to the Pensieve Scene, I sort of doubt that it occured before their OWLs (I would think that Sirius would have steered clear of Severus after he tried to kill him). Because of that scene, I feel fairly confident now (and certain this has been discused to death elsewhere) that The Prank happened in sixth year. I don't think it would have happened before the Pensieve Scene, and therefore could not have happened before the boys mastered the Animagi spell. I don't think it could have happened in 7th year, because as prefect, Remus was on the fast track to becoming Head Boy. There had to be a reason for James to get Head Boy and not Remus. I think Peter's role in The Prank was exactly the same as James' role at the beginning - that is, he knew zilch. He was not a conspirator with Sirius, and he wasn't in the shack with Remus. He was probably with James and Sirius when Snape's location was announced, and while James went to get Snape, and Peter stayed with Sirius, either waiting for the other two boys to emerge, or going with him to Dumbledore - and making sure Sirius told the story correctly. Kneasy: > I admit that [Peter paying] penance was a stab in the dark - I > have this thing about motivations and Peter as presented does not seem the > type to volunteer for hazardous duty. He'd need a strong reason, one were > the alternative was worse. It's possible that what we'll get is not what we > see now, but for the moment I prefer to think that he was shoved rather > than he jumped. More BANG. And it would need one hell of a motivation for > him to keep on going now that things are getting really nasty. There are as many motivations as there are stars in the sky. Blackmail, torture, ransom, cash reward, fear, love, resentment, reason (I mean, maybe Peter really did think Voldy was right), or even the idea that Peter has been working for DD since the first day at school. I've seen some very interesting arguments that say Peter's been working undercover basically since he was eleven - that he'd always planned to get in as James & Sirius' friend, only to stab them in the back later. Personally, I don't really buy it. I don't think an 11 year old kid has it in him to lie like that. Kneasy: > Yes, loyalty is a supposed attribute of Huffs; but loyalty to whom? > Would Peter focus on loyalty to James, to the Marauders as a group, > to DD, to the 'good' side, or what? It'd help if we had some Pettigrew > background - pureblood? family victims of Voldy? It's that lack of > credible motivation again. If you're asking me where I think Peter's loyalties lie...honestly, I have to say with himself. He's the only person who he hasn't turned his back on at any point in the books. Peter's number one goal these days, it seems, is simply to make it out alive. Juli: > > > Then WHY would DD want LV to return? Azriona: > >Because if DD waits for Harry to grow up and become a man, the series will be longer than 7 books and JKR will go the way of Robert Jordan's Wheel of Time series, and no one really wants that. Kneasy: > The Prophecy - or more likely Prophecies, I'd think. > They may be self-fulfilling but DD needs some sort of guide to > help him through the maze of possible actions and outcomes. If Seers > turn up and offer a possible route map he'd jump at it. > I know I would. Yeah, and those Seers are just *so* reliable as road maps, too. Personally, I disagree with DD's interpretation of the Prophecies. My co-writer for the PeterPaper, Amy, has an amazing theory about how the Lost Prophecy is actually about three people, not two. And personally, I'm still not convinced that the Second Prophecy isn't about Neville! * >charme: > There is a quote from Petunia which may apply here. In OoP, Petunia > refers to that "awful boy" telling Lily about Azkaban and the Dementors. I > know a lot of people believe that's referring to Snape, but I believe it's > referring to Peter. Absolutely. I was reading OoP on a plane going cross-country, and after the whole Petunia scene I had to stop people in the airport and ask if they'd finished with Chapter Two yet, because I was dying for a good Petunia-squeal. I knew the moment I'd read it that she wasn't talking about James - and I hope with all my heart that it's Peter. (I have a Peter/Petunia theory, though. Again, random Peter Conspiracies rearing their ugly heads again.) Because, seriously - why would Petunia remember that one scrap of information, if it wasn't important to her? And where the murderer of her long lost true love would be pretty darn important, wouldn't it? charme: >If that's the case, Peter would have told DD about them becoming > animagi and he didn't. DD professes not to know about in PoA and seems >rather impressed they *did* keep it from him. And yes, I do believe they did > keep it from him. Peter is weak, and Sirius points out that Peter migrates to whatever wizard is the strongest for protection. Peter himself admits there > was nothing to be gained by refusing LV. One week it could be James, > another Sirius, another LV. That's not "spy" material, IMO that's weakness. No, I don't think Peter would have had to tell DD about being Animagi, if he was the one to tell DD about the Prank. Why would he have had to do that? "Dumbledore, sir, we know that Remus is a werewolf, and Sirius was stupid and sent Snape in after him." Now, how exactly does being Animagi work into this conversation? It can be very neatly avoided. I would also argue that Peter is anything but weak. The man manages to fool his best friends into thinking he's not a Death Eater, he pulls off a spell that kills 12 Muggles in plain sight *behind his back*, he finds Voldy in Albania, overcomes Bertha Jorkins, manages some sort of spell that gives Voldy some sort of body, manages to brew a (difficult) potion that will bring Voldy back to full power, *cuts off his own hand* and still manages not to completely collapse after the fact! Good lord. As for his words in the Shrieking Shack? Cover story. To-tal cover story! And even if it's not - one could argue that it's not weakness. It's a shrewd battle plan. "Hmm. DD is old and doesn't have a great army. Voldy is powerful and has a lot of money at his disposal. You know, I think Voldy's the winning side, and here I hop over to him." It's all about self-preservation, baby. charme: >I think there's only 2 options here, either Peter >started out with the idea of spying for the Order and got sucked in > or he got recruited by LV and his followers and couldn't resist. I don't > think he's DD's eyes and ears any longer, though. He's sealed his fate by > the choices he made. If Peter was a spy at one time - what makes you say he's stopped being a spy? I don't think DD would allow anyone under his leadership to slip away quite so easily. Once you're DD's man, you're DD's man until Death. >charme: >"Peter" is also JKR's father's name. Interesting, isn't it? Very. I didn't know that - does JKR have a good relationship with her dad? *worried now* --az From hannahmarder at yahoo.co.uk Sat Nov 20 20:24:57 2004 From: hannahmarder at yahoo.co.uk (Hannah) Date: Sat, 20 Nov 2004 20:24:57 -0000 Subject: The resolution of Snape (was Re: Harry mastering his emotions in In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118260 Naama wrote: > For me, it's almost a given that Snape will die. This has been quoted many times: > > Q: There's an important kind of redemptive pattern to Snape > A: He, um, there's so much I wish I could say to you, and I can't because it would ruin. I > promise you, whoever asked that question, can I just say to you that I'm slightly stunned > that you've said that and you'll find out why I'm so stunned if you read Book 7. That's all > I'm going to say. (found in www.quick-quote-quill.org, from a 1999 interview). > > Not that she's explicitly saying, "he's going to sacrifice himself to save Harry's life"... > for me, though, it's as good as. > Hannah: That's an interesting interrpretation. I really, really hope you're right, because I'd rather have dead!good!Snape than living! evil!Snape. As a Snape fan, I felt sick when I first read this quote. I'd been fervently hoping up till then that Snape would turn out to be a good guy in the end, and maybe even end up getting on ok with Harry. I'd undergone mental contortions to excuse his behaviour up till now. But this, and a couple of other quotes, have left me thinking that, much as I would like to see redeemed Snape, it's not going to happen. I think JKR is trying to tell us that Snape isn't going to be reformed, isn't going to turn out good. I've never seen it as meaning he'll sacrifice himself for Harry, I've always thought of it as meaning he'll turn out bad in the end. To me, Snape giving his life for Harry's would be completion of the very 'redemptive pattern' that JKR seems to be debunking when she says this. But you give me new hope! Naama continued: > I agree with Lupinlore that Harry learning to grin and bear it with Snape would be insipid > [it, not you, SSSusan!]. I don't exactly know why - it sounds so healthy and well-adjusted. Hannah: JKR has so much fun writing - and we do reading - all the sparring between Harry and Snape, that I can't see her changing it too much. I think Harry has a long way to go before he can stop letting Snape bother him, and as Snape has a big part to play in the story yet, I think it's unlikely that there's going to be any truce on either side. One thing that I think could make Harry able to ignore Snape's taunting would be a better understanding of the Potions teacher, and why he behaves as he does (assuming there is some good reason). Especially if Harry could understand that Snape's hatred of him isn't actully as personal as it seems. I would argue that Snape doesn't have a problem with Harry exactly, more what he percieves the boy as representing. He doesn't hate the real Harry, as he doesn't really know Harry. He hated Harry before he met him, and the things he criticises in Harry, such as arrogance, don't tie in at all with the character we have come to know. So maybe Harry will come to understand that Snape's hatred of him is Snape's own problem, not his, and that, I think, would enable him to just let it wash over him and not feel he has to defend himself. For example: Harry: 'So Professor Snape had a son my age who was murdered by Voldemort and that's why he hates me so much? I never thought I'd feel sorry for Snape again... Oh well, in that case nothing I do is ever going to make him like me or treat me better, and he's obviously a bit sad, I've got more important things to worry about...' Hannah, taking a short break from watching her new PoA DVD (it's the best!) Fanfic at www.schnoogle.com/authorLinks/Hannah_Marder/ From carolynwhite2 at aol.com Sat Nov 20 21:27:21 2004 From: carolynwhite2 at aol.com (carolynwhite2) Date: Sat, 20 Nov 2004 21:27:21 -0000 Subject: The Art of Love according to Albus Dumbledore (was:Harry left at the Dursleys) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118261 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "lupinlore" wrote: > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "carolynwhite2" > wrote: > > > > I submit that Dumbledore failed with Tom, big time ('it's our > > choices'). It's that pain he is re-living, and which makes him take such a cool, clinical attitude to Harry. > Lupinlore: > There is an attractiveness to this argument, and perhaps something to it, but I don't buy it in this context. Having failed with Tom the first time, Ddore would be incredibly foolish to embark on a similar deliberate experiment (i.e. child abuse) with Harry. > > Now, I will admit that I just don't buy the whole alchemical > explanation. I think it is reading WAAAAAAAAY too much into the > text. But that is my opinion and other people are, of course, > entitled to theirs. But I think this is a point where it is the > weakest, because here it (if I understand it correctly) requires > Dumbledore to do something that is not only reprehensible, but > foolish. > Carolyn: Ah, you mistake me. Despite Iris's many delightful explanations, alas I don't (as yet) buy the alchemy idea either. I think that even if the theme holds good right to the end of the series, it will only ever be a fascinating, and endlessly-arguable meta-interpretation of events, rather than the core driving force behind the plot. And nothing wrong with that. The more layers of complexity at the end, the better. Anything but a simplistic, heroic moral solution, please. But nor do I have much time for the child abuse idea, either, I am afraid. Unless, that is, you are implying that Dumbledore was also instrumental in getting Tom into his orphanage, and, in general, subscribes to Wackford Squeers-type educational principles? He's a tough old bird, and I wouldn't entirely put anything past him, but actually, he states his intentions quite clearly on this topic: 'you arrived at Hogwarts, neither as happy nor as well-nourished as I would have liked, perhaps, yet alive and healthy. You were not a pampered little prince, but as normal a boy as I could have hoped under the circumstances. Thus far my plan was working well.' There isn't much of an apology here for his decision about the Dursleys, and his angst (such as it is) is reserved for subsequent decisions he made about Harry's life. IMO, when DD heard Trelawny's first prophecy, he took it as information for him to act on, a way of ultimately dealing with Tom Riddle, who he had so unintentionally unleashed into the WW. The interesting thing, obviously, is whether Harry's going to go along with the plan. Carolyn From manawydan at ntlworld.com Sat Nov 20 22:27:21 2004 From: manawydan at ntlworld.com (manawydan) Date: Sat, 20 Nov 2004 22:27:21 -0000 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Muggleborns choosing WW References: <1100936575.6029.7344.m6@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <001b01c4cf50$1b45a960$704b6d51@f3b7j4> No: HPFGUIDX 118262 Sandy wrote: >Maybe I'm just stuck in Muggle thought processes, but I don't see >that most wizarding jobs are all that much different from their >Muggle counterparts, or "stripped of the unpleasant part of work." >Teachers still have to plan lessons, grade papers and keep an eye out >for the exploding cauldron or stray spell that turns a student into a >water buffalo or causes their teeth to grow like a beaver's; civil >servants still have to deal with paperwork and red tape; shop keepers >have to be physically present during business hours, etc. I'm sure you didn't mean to imply that Muggle teachers have to deal with those eventualities (a fascinating thought if they did)! But no, I'm not implying that work doesn't _exist_ in the WW, just that we haven't seen any canon evidence for useless or alienating work. >let them churn out elf clothes day and night.) You can't just conjure >up a flying broom, someone still has the tedious-sounding job of picking >out the right sticks and twigs and putting them together properly, as >well as adding the appropriate charms to guarantee it flies, is >balanced and will brake when needed. An assembly line job to create a >magical product. Maybe a broom maker takes enormous pride in putting together the right sticks and twigs and it's a closely guarded craft secret, of course... This once again isn't something which canon tells us. _Are_ broomsticks made on an assembly line by miserable workers each of whom has the task of installing one particular twig, or are they made individually by time served craftswizards in a workshop, each signed by the person who produced them? (Coinage has the individual mark of the producer, but that's made by goblins so it would be risky to extend that analogy). >I will grant you that driving the Knight Bus would be a whole lot >more fun than the Muggle equivalent of driving a Greyhound through >rural Mississippi, but even then you have to deal with nauseous >passengers. Evanesco. >The only job that sounds totally cool is the one there's no Muggle >equivalent for -- Bill Weasley's exotic job as a curse-breaker in >Egypt. But I'm sure it has its own dirty, dusty, dangerous drawbacks >as well. Wouldn't fancy it myself (is it the job or the job holder that's cool in this case!?) But JKR alone knows all Cheers Ffred O Benryn wleth hyd Luch Reon Cymru yn unfryd gerhyd Wrion Gwret dy Cymry yghymeiri From kelsey_dangelo at yahoo.com Sun Nov 21 00:04:40 2004 From: kelsey_dangelo at yahoo.com (Kelsey Dangelo) Date: Sat, 20 Nov 2004 16:04:40 -0800 (PST) Subject: ESE!Sirius/ The Second Prophesy In-Reply-To: <1100825308.5137.98865.m21@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <20041121000440.33996.qmail@web53104.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 118263 "chrusotoxos" wrote: About Sirius' flight from Azkaban, yeah, that's strange. But there could be something JKR is not telling us. I mean, maybe normally they had protection against animagi, but that day something went wrong without Sirius knowing. There is no prison from which you can't escape. Kelsey: Here! Here! I totally agree with your defense of Sirius as a good guy. Here's my answer to the reason why Sirius "waited" until Harry's third year to break out of prison. It's not that there was animagi protection; its the Dementors that keep people "locked in their own heads", going crazy with depression, reliving their horrible experiences over and over. Sirius was laboring under that, with only his ability to turn into a dog to slightly escape. That and the belief that he was innocent, or the obsession, more like. That's what's keeping him in there, the horrible effects of the Dementors [he's one of the most heavily guarded there]. Besides, what does he have to escape to? A world that fears and hates him and a godson, best friends, and former comrades that thinks he's a murderer and traitor. He'd be hunted down and caught easily. And there's no hope of trying to find Peter and prove his innocence (like looking for a needle in a haystack). So the reason Sirius doesn't leave Azkaban is because 1.) he can't. 2.) there's no reason. And therein lies how he is able to escape. So why does Sirius decide to risk going into the world, risk his life, and face everyone that once were his friends? Because with the arrival of Fudge's newspaper, he learns that Peter (traitor and DE) is near Harry, and Sirius is the only one who knows the danger. That thought is what gives Sirius the strength to be able to escape--to save Harry. Aww, the power of love. "'But I was weak, very weak, and I had no hope of driving [the dementors] away from me without a wand......So you see, I had to do something. I was the only one who knew Peter was still alive.......It was as if someone had lit a fire in my head, and the dementors couldn't destroy it...'" Sirius says, page 371-372 USA POA IOW, the reason why Sirius didn't escape until then was, simply, he couldn't until then. Kelsey __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Meet the all-new My Yahoo! - Try it today! http://my.yahoo.com From snow15145 at yahoo.com Sun Nov 21 00:58:56 2004 From: snow15145 at yahoo.com (snow15145) Date: Sun, 21 Nov 2004 00:58:56 -0000 Subject: Unfortunate!Peter In-Reply-To: <003701c4cf23$08bc7530$6701a8c0@MITRE.ORG> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118264 Kneasy: One of the FAQs that crops up regularly is Scabbers' association with the Weasleys. How long has he been there, along with musing on how a long-lived non-magical rat was accepted as a pet at Hogwarts for years and no-one so much as blinked. What was Peter likely to know about the Weasleys? Damn all, I should think. Neither Molly nor Arthur appear on Moody's photograph and so probably weren't in the Order in the first Voldy War, and they were at school years before him and their kids were years after him. Charme: Of your whole post, this is the one paragraph that interests me the most. We have never been told "why" Molly and Arthur weren't on the photo when so many others were, plus we're left to wonder how Peter got to Percy and the Weasleys as a pet. Snow: Actually we have been told that Molly and Arthur were not a part of the first Order and therefore would not have been in the picture: OOP The Woes of Mrs. Weasley >Lupin talking to Molly< "Oh, Molly, come on, it's about time you got used to hearing it-look, I cant promise no one's going to get hurt, nobody can promise that, but we're much better off than we were last time, you weren't in the Order then, you don't understand " Although Molly was not in the Order the first time she had family members who had been, and were killed, Fabian and Gideon Prewett. We don't know how Molly was related to them, brothers possibly, but we do know through Arthur's description in GOF of the dark mark that they had become victims of the first war: GOF The Dark Mark "Ron, You-Know-Who and his followers sent the Dark Mark into the air whenever they killed," [ ] "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. Sounds like first hand knowledge, most likely the Prewett brothers. This could also be the connection factor as to why Peter-Scabbers chose the Weasleys as home. Peter was in the Order with the Prewetts and could have known that this would be the type of family that would accept a rat as a pet without question or time to take notice of the rat's longevity. So many children too little time to be concerned with a child's pet. Percy would have been between five and six years old if Peter immediately took up residence at the Weasleys. This would be about the right age for Percy to play healer to a hurt rat with a bleeding paw. Snow From easimm at yahoo.com Sun Nov 21 00:59:42 2004 From: easimm at yahoo.com (curlyhornedsnorkack) Date: Sun, 21 Nov 2004 00:59:42 -0000 Subject: The length of the Pensieve Scene In-Reply-To: <20041120122612.77358.qmail@web53108.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118266 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Magda Grantwich wrote > ...if that is the case, why didn't Remus and Sirius tell Harry that > when he confronted them through the fireplace? If there were any > reason whatsoever that would have in some way explained James' > actions that day, they would have told Harry because their prime > concern at that moment was his feelings. ... > Instead they tell him that people are idiots at 15 ("I'm 15!" - love > that line) and that they were sometimes arrogant birks, and Remus > says that he never told them "to lay off Snape", that they were "out > of order" (which is a funny pun, if you think of it: order/Order). > There's nothing in their discussion to indicate that Snape was trying > to do anything to them. Very punny! Since Lupin and Sirius are adults in the fire scene, they would probably realize that Snape's action of following the Marauders wouldn't have excused their actions towards Snape. Also, they might realize that trying to excuse themselves by blaming Snape for their cruelty would be a bad example for a teenager. Besides, since Snape is in the OOTP, it would not be in the Order's interest for them to exacerbate bad feeling for Snape. > As for exposing Remus' secret: the person who did that was Sirius > Black, one of his closest friends, and that apparently happened in > the next school year, according to canon. I can't remember this - where is it? Are you referring to the part in POA where Sirius admits luring Snape into a trap? If so: It's possible that Sirius could have tried to solve the Snape problem by having Snape be bitten by a werewolf. If he did not die he would become a werewolf, and Snape, who would be in the same position as Lupin, would lose his compulsion to expose Lupin as a werewolf. > James was not punishing Snape - he was providing amusement for Sirius > because he was bored ("'I'm not proud of it,' Sirius said quickly.") Snape's selection of some dense bushes near the Marauders to sit by and the actions I mentioned previously continue to be suspicious, even if the Marauders take the opportunity to amuse themselves by punishing him for snooping. Perhaps the following should be new thread, but what the heck: As for Sirius' comment, "I'm not proud of it" Sirius might have been lying. Immediately after Sirius said it, "Lupin looked sideways at Sirius". To me, this action means that Lupin might have been sceptical of Sirius' sincerity. I think Sirius said it because he figured it was what a godfather who was partly responsible for Harry's moral development should say to a teenage boy. In the real world, I bet some parents who admit to their children that they took drugs when they were young say "I'm not proud of it", even when they are unrepentant. > Also I'm not clear on how Snape was following the Marauders when it > was him who left the hall first and the Marauders followed him. It seems that Snape got through the Great Hall door first, but it's not clear who actually got through the Entrance Hall first. JKR writes a few paragraphs later that Harry looked "behind him again" to see what Snape was doing, in case Snape went in a different direction from the Marauders. > Sirius' claim that Snape was sneaking around trying to get them > expelled (and so deserved whatever happened during the Prank) takes > on some context after the Pensieve episode. Sirius is maddenly > imprecise about when Snape started trying to get them expelled - > notice that it doesn't come up in his description of James and Snape > to Harry. If he tried to get them expelled after what we see in the > pensieve, I would find it hard to condemn Snape for that. I haven't actually written anywhere that I think Snape deserved what happened to him, but I have provided a realistic motive besides boredom for the Marauders. There is a difference between "motive" and "excuse". Also, I am not condemning Snape, I am suspecting him of spying. Snape could think he's spying for the good of Hogwarts! After all, even Lupin said no parent would want a werewolf in the school. "curlyhornedsnorkack" From jlnbtr at yahoo.com Sun Nov 21 01:11:34 2004 From: jlnbtr at yahoo.com (Juli) Date: Sat, 20 Nov 2004 17:11:34 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] The Weasleys at the Order (was Re: Unfortunate!Peter) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041121011134.33906.qmail@web53106.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 118267 > (Kneasy's post snipped) > Charme: > We > have never been told "why" Molly and Arthur weren't > on the photo when > so > many others were, plus we're left to wonder how > Peter got to Percy > and the > Weasleys as a pet. Juli: VWI was about 15 to 20 years ago, right? (I'm thinking 'today' is the year of OoP), so Molly and Arthur already have their 7 children or 6 and one on the way, who has time to battle? I guess Arthur worked around the clock, and Molly stayed at home with all the kids, Bill could have been at Hogwarts by then, but that still leaves 6 or 5 children to take care of, you just can't go off all day and fight DEs and Voldemort. But now, there're only two kids at school (Fred and George are already of age and have their own work, probably living there), so much easier to take Ron and Ginny with them to headquarters. And besides Bill and Charlie are also members, Percy is out of the picture (at least for now), Fred and George will probably join the Order.... Juli __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? The all-new My Yahoo! - Get yours free! http://my.yahoo.com From jlnbtr at yahoo.com Sun Nov 21 01:22:47 2004 From: jlnbtr at yahoo.com (Juli) Date: Sat, 20 Nov 2004 17:22:47 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: ESE!Sirius/ The Second Prophesy In-Reply-To: <20041121000440.33996.qmail@web53104.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041121012247.88064.qmail@web53102.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 118268 Kelsey: > Because with the arrival of Fudge's newspaper, he > learns that Peter (traitor and DE) is near Harry, > and > Sirius is the only one who knows the danger. That > thought is what gives Sirius the strength to be able > to escape--to save Harry. I agree Kelsey, only his obsession with Peter allowed him to keep a clear enough mind and come up with a plan on how to escape. He kept his animagus power because there was something in his mind the dementors couldn't take away from him, that is his innocence, that single thought kept him sane and eventually allowed him to get out. Juli. __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Meet the all-new My Yahoo! - Try it today! http://my.yahoo.com From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Sun Nov 21 03:06:05 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Sun, 21 Nov 2004 03:06:05 -0000 Subject: The length of the Pensieve Scene In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118269 Magda wrote previously: ...if that is the case, why didn't Remus and Sirius tell Harry that when he confronted them through the fireplace? If there were any reason whatsoever that would have in some way explained James' actions that day, they would have told Harry because their prime concern at that moment was his feelings. Curlyhornedsnorkack: Since Lupin and Sirius are adults in the fire scene, they would probably realize that Snape's action of following the Marauders wouldn't have excused their actions towards Snape. Also, they might realize that trying to excuse themselves by blaming Snape for their cruelty would be a bad example for a teenager. Besides, since Snape is in the OOTP, it would not be in the Order's interest for them to exacerbate bad feeling for Snape. Alla: Oh, I am so glad that someone else is thinking that it is a possibility that Marauders' actions towards Snape had some other possible reasons besides boredom. Curly, I like your explanation, but I think that even simpler one exists - the reasons for animosity between Snape and Marauders are not supposed to be revealed yet, it is just too early. Yes, Remus and Sirius did not tell Harry. It is just as frustrating as Harry not asking questions about his parents, but Rowling has to have some surprises up her sleeve yet. She knocked James from his Saint!Pedestal. In the next books it will be Snape turn, me thinks. Magda previously: Sirius is maddenly imprecise about when Snape started trying to get them expelled - notice that it doesn't come up in his description of James and Snape to Harry. If he tried to get them expelled after what we see in the pensieve, I would find it hard to condemn Snape for that. Alla: Ummm, are you saying that pensieve encounter was their first episode EVER? Lily did not seem to think that. Sirius infamous comment about Snape suggests that they knew each other way before the fifth year, IMO. I disagree, I think A LOT happened before Pensieve scene and A LOT after it, but this is mainly speculation, of course. Curlyhornedsnorkack: I haven't actually written anywhere that I think Snape deserved what happened to him, but I have provided a realistic motive besides boredom for the Marauders. There is a difference between "motive" and "excuse". Also, I am not condemning Snape, I am suspecting him of spying. Snape could think he's spying for the good of Hogwarts! After all, even Lupin said no parent would want a werewolf in the school. Alla: I agree, Snape may have thought that he had good motives for spying, but my preferred speculation would be that long feud existed between Potters and Snapes or (I think this was Magda's theory) - that Sirius and Snape were somehow related. From bob.oliver at cox.net Sun Nov 21 03:52:46 2004 From: bob.oliver at cox.net (lupinlore) Date: Sun, 21 Nov 2004 03:52:46 -0000 Subject: The Art of Love according to Albus Dumbledore (was:Harry left at the Dursleys) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118270 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "carolynwhite2" wrote: > > > But nor do I have much time for the child abuse idea, either, I am > afraid. Unless, that is, you are implying that Dumbledore was also > instrumental in getting Tom into his orphanage, and, in general, > subscribes to Wackford Squeers-type educational principles? > > He's a tough old bird, and I wouldn't entirely put anything past him, > but actually, he states his intentions quite clearly on this topic: > > 'you arrived at Hogwarts, neither as happy nor as well-nourished as I > would have liked, perhaps, yet alive and healthy. You were not a > pampered little prince, but as normal a boy as I could have hoped > under the circumstances. Thus far my plan was working well.' > > There isn't much of an apology here for his decision about the > Dursleys, and his angst (such as it is) is reserved for subsequent > decisions he made about Harry's life. Well, I don't know if there is an apology here or not. If you take a little bit longer quote, the one that begins "You had suffered..." and look at the entire speech in context, it could be an apology and it could not. We are missing one crucial piece of evidence -- the tone of Dumbledore's voice. If he made this speech sadly, regretfully, or with bitter irony (as if pointing his words at himself) then I think there IS an implied apology here for a lot of things. That might be supported if it was indeed Dumbledore who had the Order threaten the Dursleys, which might be seen as him making amends by trying to act to fix as much of his mistake as he could. On the other hand if his tone of voice is flat, then I don't know that it tells us he ISN'T sorry, but it doesn't tell us he is. We just don't have enough facts here. > > The interesting thing, obviously, is whether Harry's going to go > along with the plan. Yes, that is indeed a very interesting question. Lupinlore From catlady at wicca.net Sun Nov 21 05:56:36 2004 From: catlady at wicca.net (Catlady (Rita Prince Winston)) Date: Sun, 21 Nov 2004 05:56:36 -0000 Subject: Phineas/chapter31/Galleon/LVnoHeir/DEs/chains-Sirius,James,Lupin,Peter/ more Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118271 Lupinlore wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/117894 : << One is Phineus Nigellus. It is a reasonable assumption that before being "Hogwarts' least popular Headmaster" he was Head of Slytherin. It is interesting that, unlike the case with Salazar and Snape, we have no indication that Nigellus was ever tainted with being a Dark Wizard (except perhaps by association with the Black family). Also it is of interest that in his interactions with Harry and Dumbledore he comes across as snotty and sarcastic, but never evinces the bitter pettiness, or the extreme unfairness, that characterizes Severus. >> The Portrait of Phineas Nigellus is an adorable snarky character, but it seems to me that if Phineas Nigellus was the least popular Headmaster that Hogwarts ever had (Hogwarts has been around for a thosand years, so it must have gone through many Headmasters), he *must* have been nastier in real life than as a portrait. And it seems to me that simply having been generous in handing out floggings, hanging from the ceiling by the hands, and so on, wouldn't have been enough to have been *most* hated; it seems to me that there must also have been unfairness involved. Perhaps the portrait is much better behaved than the real person because the portrait has less opportunity to behave badly. Perhaps the portrait felt sympathy for Voldie, Lucius, and Belletrix, and distaste for Muggle-lovers Albus, Arthur, Sirius, Harry, and Hermione, and would have *liked* to betray the Order of the Phoenix to the Death Eaters, but was unable to do help Voldie etc or harm DD etc because apparently all the portraits of former Headmasters and Headmistresses were oath-bound to help the current Headmaster, and perhaps that oath is a powerful piece of magic that a portrait cannot disobey, and I imagine that portraits can't as good as House Elves at betraying their masters. Juli summarized Chapter 31 in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/117895 : << In the afternoon Harry and Ron had Divination, and of course they failed it since neither one could see anything. >> Harry "lost his head completely during tea-leaf reading, saying that it looked to him like Professor Marchbanks would shortly be meeting a round, dark, soggy stranger, and rounded off the whole fiasco by mixing up the life and head lines on her palm and informing her that she should have died the previous Tuesday." Ron "had told the examiner in detail about the ugly man with a wart on his nose in his crystal ball, only to look up and realise he had been describing his examiner's reflection." It *sounds* funny, and fiasco-like, and especially that Ron's examiner would be prejudiced against Ron for calling him 'ugly', but for all we know, those were the *right* answers. Carol wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/118106 : < > 1. Why was Draco Malfoy next to Harry during their Charms > exam? If they were called alphabetically, Draco must > have been called long before Harry. > Granted, there would be six people between Malfoy and Harry (Moon, Nott, Parkinson, the Patil twins, and Sally-Anne Perks, SS/PS Am. ed. 131), just as there were during the Sorting ceremony, but IIRC, we're told that Harry stepped up to an examiner who didn't have a student with him at the moment. It's like being in line at a bank and going to the "next available teller," who will not necessarily be next to the teller serving the person in front of you. Or checking in your luggage at an airport (where they've now resorted to holding up signs to tell you which counter to go to). So Harry could easily have ended up next to Draco, who would be finishing his exam as Harry began his. >> Harry was called with "Parkinson, Pansy - Patil, Padma - Patil, Parvati - Potter, Harry" so it appears that Sally-Anne Perks didn't take the Charms OWL. << wondering who Moon is >> I also wonder who Moon is, and I hope it's an old wizarding family, because I've used it all over my fanfic, like naming a character Madeline "Mad" Moon. Del wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGr ownups/message/117907 : << Dungrolling wrote : <<< that makes an approximate exchange rate of: 1 Galleon = ?5.12 >>> Now all your British folks : what do you think of that exchange rate ? Does it feel right to you ? We don't know the price of many things, so it's hard to say, which is why I'm just asking for a general feeling. Of course, if that exchange rate is not really advantageous to Muggles, I could always argue that it's because JKR is bad at maths, >> Also, JKR said in a chat that a Galleon is worth about 5 pounds. http://www.quick-quote-quill.org/articles/2001/030 1-comicrelief-staff.htm <> Which was around 7 US dollars at the time, altho' now closer to 10 *sigh* I remember that, before GoF, I tried to figure the value of a Galleon from canon, and I thought it should be like $40 - $50 (in which case, the exchange rate is *damn* favorable to Muggles), but I can't remember what my reasoning was. Kim wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGr ownups/message/117948 : << Also, there's the frightening, not to mention nauseating, thought that Voldemort may have had a love-child (hate-child?) that he's unaware of, sometime over the years, despite the general belief that he's the last heir of Slytherin. >> http://www.the-leaky-cauldron.org/extras/JKRWorldBookDay2004.html << Harry: Has Voldermort any children JK Rowling replies -> No. Voldemort as a father... now that's not a nice thought. >> Also, in the "Rumors" section of her website, one rumor is "Voldemort is Harry's real father/grandfather/close relative of some description" and part of her answer is "And hasn't Dumbledore already told Harry that Voldemort is the last surviving descendent of Salazar Slytherin? Just to clarify - this means that Harry is NOT a descendent of Salazar Slytherin." << After all, even evil old Salazar must have found time for "romance" or he wouldn't have *had* any heirs. >> He wouldn't have had to find *much* time, only a few minutes. If all he wanted was the heir, not the sex, maybe he could have saved time and avoided messiness by magically transporting his sperm from, um, inside his body to inside the devoted volunteer's body. Potioncat wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/117994 : << Did Tom form the Death Eaters or did he rise in their ranks? >> http://www.quick-quote-quill.org/articles/2003/0619-bbcnews-paxman.htm << JK ROWLING: - in here is the history of the Death Eaters and I don't know that I'll ever actually need it - but at some point - which were once called something different - they were called the Knights of Walpurgis. >> I have in my mind that JKR said somewhere (but maybe I dreamed it) that the Knights of Walpurgis existed before LV took it over. Dungrollin wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/117915 : << Have I missed it, or has anyone come up with a way of making the '... chained these twelve years. Tonight, before midnight, the servant will break free ...' fit with Sirius, who escaped from Azkaban 10 months previously? >> I believe both Sirius and Lupin are Good Guys, but on that night, Sirius was freed of being thought a murderer & traitor by Lupin and Harry. Ravenclaw Bookworm wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/117981 : << who wonders why we refer to James and Sirius by first names, but Lupin by his last name >> Because the narratorial voice does! Neri wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforG rownups/message/118003: <<"Sirius's great redeeming quality is how much affection he is capable of feeling. He loved James like a brother and he went on to transfer that attachment to Harry.">> I strongly believe in Sirius's utter doggy loyalty to James and Harry, but it occurs to me that 'love him like a brother' isn't that great a recommendation. How much did Sirius and Regulus love each other? How much do the Twins love Percy? << Of course, the solution to this small problem is obvious: There must be TWO people named Sirius in the HP saga, and JKR was referring to the other Sirius in this quote. >> Like everyone else, I LOL at your efficient suggestion. Kneasy wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/118201 : << If he was in animagus form I'd have thought Crookshannks would have forced him out of it. Being chewed up as moggy appetiser is just as bad and much more immediate than being chased by DEs. (snip) when Scabbers runs away (when Ron thinks Crookshanks has eaten him) >> An Animagus keeps his/her own mind in animal form but a Transfigured person has only the mind of the animal that they were Transfigured into. So if Peter had been Transfigured into a rat, how did he think of leaving blood & stuff on the bed to fake his death? << As a final indicator there's his name, and we all appreciate how JKR likes fitting names to characters. Pettigrew - small of stature, nothing special there; but Peter - the rock, that's something else. >> Peter, who denied Christ three times before cockcrow. Someone posted that his personal and family names both mean 'to become smaller': Peter as in 'to peter out' and Pettigrew as in 'grew petty'. Potioncat wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/118072 : << Have we discussed whether the awards on JKR's site are canon? I'm talking about the trophies that include such names as Percy Weasley, Sirius Black, Frank Longbottom, Bellatrix Black, Tom Riddle, James -----, Lily Evans. What does the group think? Did these characters earn awards or is this just window dressing? >> I suspect that the Trophy Room of the website is not canon, or at least has nothing to do with whether those people won those awards, or any other awards, but in case it is canon, I previously suggested that Sirius's cup might for Dueling Champion or Broomstick Racing (i.e. an individual sport). Siriusly Snapey Susan: << who, after viewing photos of the PoA launch party in London, wants to take some scissors to some of these young men's hair! check it out http://news.bbc.co.uk/cbbcnews/hi/newsid_4020000/n ewsid_4024300/4024351.stm http://www.hpana.com/imageviewer.cfm?nid=18404&f=dan-alfonso.jpg >> I *love* their beautiful long hair! I hope this means it's coming back into style. Sophierom wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/118219 : << Peter ... feeds LV Nagini's milk in a bottle >> I *think* he feeds LV Nagini's *venom* in a bottle, as 'milking' a snake is the word for extracting venom from it (by getting it to bite a towel or something so that the venom runs into a beaker) to use to make antivenin or whatever. From gbannister10 at aol.com Sun Nov 21 07:48:58 2004 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Sun, 21 Nov 2004 07:48:58 -0000 Subject: Phineas/chapter31/Galleon/LVnoHeir/DEs/chains-Sirius,James,Lupin,Peter/ more In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118272 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Catlady (Rita Prince Winston)" wrote: Carol: > < > > > 1. Why was Draco Malfoy next to Harry during their Charms > > exam? If they were called alphabetically, Draco must > > have been called long before Harry. > > Geoff: But how long before? How many names are there between Malfoy and Potter alphabetically? How long does a Charms test take? Probably varies from examiner to examiner. Griselda Marchbanks might be a very thorough person and the test was halfway through at this point. > Granted, there would be six people between Malfoy and Harry (Moon, > Nott, Parkinson, the Patil twins, and Sally-Anne Perks, SS/PS Am. ed. > 131), just as there were during the Sorting ceremony, but IIRC, we're > told that Harry stepped up to an examiner who didn't have a student > with him at the moment. It's like being in line at a bank and going to > the "next available teller," who will not necessarily be next to the > teller serving the person in front of you. Or checking in your luggage > at an airport (where they've now resorted to holding up signs to tell > you which counter to go to). So Harry could easily have ended up next > to Draco, who would be finishing his exam as Harry began his. >> Geoff: As I commented above, he was halfway through... though that must have been an estimate on someone's part. Canon agrees with the "teller" idea... '"Good luck," said Ron quietly. Harry walked into the Great Hall, clutching his wand so tightly his hand shook. "Professor Tofty is free, Potter," squeaked Professor Flitwick who was standing just inside the door. He pointed Harry towards what looked like the oldeat and baldest examiner who was sitting behind a small table in a far corner, a short distance from Professor Marchbanks, who was halfway through testing Draco Malfoy.' (OOTP "OWLs" p. 629 UK edition) Geoff http://www.aspectsofexmoor.com From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com Sun Nov 21 11:28:24 2004 From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (Barry Arrowsmith) Date: Sun, 21 Nov 2004 11:28:24 +0000 Subject: Unfortunate!Peter Message-ID: <750698FD-3BB0-11D9-92A8-000A9577CB94@btconnect.com> No: HPFGUIDX 118273 Comments on two responses in this one. Let's start with charme: Lotsa snips > First, I have to say I love your posts, Kneasy. Most of the time I read them and say, "the man has a good point and thinks way out of the box." This time though, I have a different opinion and hope that you'll accept it as such. :) > Kneasy: Way out of the box? There's some out there that think I'm way out of my skull. Glad you enjoy them and IMO it's differing opinions that makes life entertaining. >charme: There is a quote from Petunia which may apply here. In OoP, Petunia refers to that "awful boy" telling Lily about Azkaban and the Dementors. I know a lot of people believe that's referring to Snape, but I believe it's referring to Peter. > Kneasy: Peter as Lothario - is that your meaning? If Peter ever went to the Evans/Dursley establishment (do we know if it happened before Petunia married Vernon?) then I'd have expected him to be one of a group. No confirmation of course, that'd make things too easy. There's an interesting aspect to this little aside - why would anyone want to talk to Petunia about Azkaban? Hardly a subject for polite conversation over tea and cakes - unless, as I posted a few weeks ago Harry's grandparents died as a result of Voldy/DE action. > charme: I think it was James who told DD about the incident in the Shrieking Shack after he'd saved Snape. Furthermore, I think at the end of PoA, Snape is furious Sirius is missing and flips out reminding DD that Sirius tried to kill him (re: Whomping Willow incident). This in my mind means at some point in the past, DD and Snape have discussed this before. > Kneasy: I don't see it that way. Snape enters the tunnel, sees a werewolf, gets dragged out by James - what would he do? Scream his head off, I'd imagine, "Werewolf!" It'd be round the school in 5 minutes flat. But it wasn't. Snape has no reason to keep quiet and every reason to tell everybody what he's seen. He doesn't. To me that implies there was somebody on the spot to tell him to keep quiet, calm down, let's go to my office. Who else but DD? > charme: If that's the case, Peter would have told DD about them becoming animagi and he didn't. DD professes not to know about in PoA and seems rather impressed they *did* keep it from him. And yes, I do believe they did keep it from him. Peter is weak, and Sirius points out that Peter migrates to whatever wizard is the strongest for protection. Peter himself admits there was nothing to be gained by refusing LV. One week it could be James, another Sirius, another LV. That's not "spy" material, IMO that's weakness. > Kneasy: What DD admits to knowing and what he actually knows are two very different things IMO. I just can't envision him locking up a student/werewolf in an isolated shack every month and not checking up on him, keeping an eye on him. And one very good way of doing so is to have someone in the Marauders keeping him up to date with what they were up to. Peter. As for gravitating to the strongest - who's stronger than DD? No, I suspect that this is Sirius sour grapes; he's second fiddle to James. He accepts it but it doesn't mean he likes it, especially when a nonentity like Peter rubs it in by fawning on James and ignoring Sirius. > > 2. Scabbers vanishes into the sewers. Right. Then what? Where does he > > go? Who does he see? Want a suggestion? OK - Dumbledore. > > > charme: How about another suggestion or two? Lucius Malfoy or even Fudge, as Fudge was the first person on the scene after Peter's suppposed demise. I could also think of others Peter could have gone to, so DD isn't the only one. > Kneasy: At the time Fudge wasn't important in the Ministry. Unless he's a secret DE he'd have no reason to hide Peter. If he was a DE then the same arguments apply as to Malfoy: if Peter had gone to either then it's unlikely that the DEs later caught after the Longbottoms were tortured would believe Peter to be dead - they'd know he wasn't. Malfoy has no reason to keep it from them and if he thought that Peter had betrayed Voldy then Peter would have become a stain on the carpet in short order. > charme: How about Peter was "stuck"? In canon, the point is made that specifically that the Animagi state can be dangerous and that's why the Ministry, and Hogwarts, are so sensitive to transformations like it. > Kneasy: A possibility. I always try and keep a close watch on seemingly throw-away lines from JKR; I believe they're there for a reason. > charme: I don't think this is the mystery you do. Hagrid is overwhelming a lover of animals and if he saw a rat, he wouldn't kill it, he'd feed it and take care of it. In other words, the similiarity there exists with Peter again being protected by the "biggest and strongest," just in a different sense. > Kneasy: Ah. I don't think you see what I was getting at. Scabbers has been around the school for years. How likely is it that Hagrid wouldn't recognise him? So why didn't he wander up to Ron "'ere. I got your rat in my hut"? Because I think Hagrid is deeper in DD's councils than we suspect. He may be a gofer, but even gofers can have sensitive information. If DD knows who Scabbers is I'd not be surprised if Hagrid did too. > charme: I think Peter is the ultimate "flip flopper." In PoA, he admits he did tell LV where the Potters were, and refers to LV's powers and that LV would kill him had he not done as he was told. He does not deny he was spying for LV for a full year before James and Lily were killed. If that's not bad enough, Peter uses the logic that LV was taking over everywhere, what was to be gained by refusing him? I think there's only 2 options here, either Peter started out with the idea of spying for the Order and got sucked in or he got recruited by LV and his followers and couldn't resist. I don't think he's DD's eyes and ears any longer, though. He's sealed his fate by the choices he made. > Kneasy: Oh, there's always possible alternatives. It's possible to interpret the Prophecy to mean that the Potters *must* die to produce the one with the power to defeat Voldy. Would DD sacrifice James and Lily to produce Weapon!Harry and win? Yes; I think he would. Better a few deaths now than thousands later. Sad but true. In which case Peter was doing what DD needed to be done. Now azriona: > Disinterested? Are we sure? I've always felt that those Pensieve scenes, while they may show more than the person to whom the memory belongs, are still influenced by that person. The same with the other Pensieve scenes. We saw the Wizengamot trials from Dumbledore's viewpoint, with Dumbledore's specific memories. And the image of Bertha Jorkins that pops out is how *Dumbledore* saw her - and is certainly part of a larger memory which he chooses not to share. (Appropros to nothing, I always figured that the boy Bertha was talking about was Peter. But that's just me. And I half wonder that he wasn't the one eavesdropping on Trelawney's Lost Prophecy as well. But I am a great Peter Conspiratist, and tend to see him everywhere.) > Kneasy: I see(!) it slightly differently. In the trials memory Harry sits beside DD but never tries to move around as he does in Snape's memory. So he does, by chance or by choice, see the whole thing as an observer with DD's viewpoint. But I submit that if he had moved he'd have seen or heard things not noticeable from DD's seat - just as he did in Snape's memory. Bertha and Sybill are censored memories. Where's DD for a start? was anyone else present? DD uses it to show that part of a memory he wants others to see and can (does?) suppress other parts. For myself, Bertha was talking about Snape who married Florence and produced the crying child we see in his memory flash. >azirona: Forgive me if I'm wrong, but didn't we have a solid time frame at one point? I could have sworn The Prank happened in their fifth year...but to go back to the Pensieve Scene, I sort of doubt that it occured before their OWLs (I would think that Sirius would have steered clear of Severus after he tried to kill him). Because of that scene, I feel fairly confident now (and certain this has been discused to death elsewhere) that The Prank happened in sixth year. I don't think it would have happened before the Pensieve Scene, and therefore could not have happened before the boys mastered the Animagi spell. I don't think it could have happened in 7th year, because as prefect, Remus was on the fast track to becoming Head Boy. There had to be a reason for James to get Head Boy and not Remus. > Kneasy: Timings are difficult - because we still run up against that awkward question - why did Sevvy ask Sirius about Lupin and why did he believe the answer if Grey Underwear happened before the Prank? I even highlighted this by means of a suggestion for the exchange that might have taken place (post 105755) > azirona: There are as many motivations as there are stars in the sky. Blackmail, torture, ransom, cash reward, fear, love, resentment, reason (I mean, maybe Peter really did think Voldy was right), or even the idea that Peter has been working for DD since the first day at school. > Kneasy: Yes, there are. How many would apply to Peter, particularly if he got into DD's clutches while still at school? Only two that I can think of - idealism and fear. And I don't trust idealists. > azirona: If you're asking me where I think Peter's loyalties lie...honestly, I have to say with himself. He's the only person who he hasn't turned his back on at any point in the books. Peter's number one goal these days, it seems, is simply to make it out alive. > Kneasy: Reasonable, logical... and I suspect not. Too many hints that he has an important role to play, probably something involving Harry and therefore not a situation where he need stick his neck out. He could do the Igor bit "Yes master! Of course Master!" and spend his evenings polishing his knuckles, eventually going down the pan with the rest of the losers. Somehow I expect more entertainment from our Peter. From alshainofthenorth at yahoo.co.uk Sun Nov 21 12:45:57 2004 From: alshainofthenorth at yahoo.co.uk (alshainofthenorth) Date: Sun, 21 Nov 2004 12:45:57 -0000 Subject: Revisiting the Black family tree Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118274 Hi, When Sirius says that all pure-blooded families are inter-related, people usually tend to take it literally and infer that every old family we've seen in the books so far has to be on the Black family tree. I'd like to challenge this conception a bit and at the same time check if I'm reading more into the text than what is actually there (then again, this wouldn't be unusual in HPFGU either), and save the family tree from breaking under the weight. Basically I'm viewing it as equal parts of generalisation and hyperbole. For all that pure-bloods are said to be rare, there seems to be a lot of them dotted throughout the books. The Blacks, the Crouches, the Lestranges and the Malfoys are explicitly pure-blooded, the Fudges probably so as well (assuming that Cornelius isn't just projecting his own insecurities when he's placing overmuch importance on blood purity), the Longbottoms, the Snapes as per JKR, the Death Eater families -- Crabbes, Goyles, Notts, Mulcibers, Traverses, Rosiers, Wilkeses. Several possible others, including but not limited to Weasleys, Flints, Bletchleys, Warringtons, Bulstrodes, Derricks, Boles, Higgses, Montagues, Zabinis, Parkinsons, Puceys, Browns, Cornfoots, Greengrasses, and MacDougals. Unfortunately I don't have a degree in genetics, so I can't tell how many generations of intermarriage it would take for thirty-ish families to produce a gene pool so uniform that fresh blood would become necessary. What I'm dead certain about, however, is that the WW must have its Capulets and its Montagues, families that wouldn't interbreed even if their survival depended on it. I tend to interpret Sirius' words as meaning "All pureblood families are interrelated, though not necessarily all with one another. My mother would have thrown a wobbler if I'd married Lucia Zabini. Or Edith Bulstrode. Or Lavinia Higgs. And imagine having to be related to Snape, even if it was by marriage." Why doesn't he say so outright? Because that isn't the purpose of the exchange and would overshadow the crucial point, establishing the family ties between the Blacks and the Malfoys, that Kreacher may have other loyalties than his master, and that he'll at one point take orders from other family members. At the same time JKR retains some mystery; if the Black family tree isn't conclusive, other pureblood players can still enter the scene with or without family connections. (Though I wish she wouldn't be so inventive with funny names and stick to working with what she already has instead. It struck me when checking the chocolate frog cards at the Lexicon that the family names in modern magical society are entirely absent from historical accounts. Surely there must have been medieval Malfoys, Blacks, Snapes or Longbottoms who distinguished themselves enough to be mentioned in History of Magic or on chocolate frog cards? But that's beside the point.) Alshain From willsonkmom at msn.com Sun Nov 21 12:55:28 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Sun, 21 Nov 2004 12:55:28 -0000 Subject: Eagle owl wasRe: SNAPE the coward? In-Reply-To: <200411200520860.SM01080@DEVBOX> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118275 > Vivamus: > Good thought about the particular owl having a charm allowing it to find LV; > that hadn't occurred to me at all. > > On Lucius, though, I must be missing something. Why do you say he did not > know then that LV was back? Potioncat: I had thought that the Eagle owl was Malfoy's and that Malfoy was helping LV througout GoF. But the conversation in the Graveyard indicates that it is the first contact Lucius has had with LV. And given Crouch's feelings toward the DEs who went free, I don't think Lucius knew about him. So it doesn't make sense that his owl was being used. Unless of course, Crouch Jr was using that owl for a particular reason, without Lucius' knowledge. From mgrantwich at yahoo.com Sun Nov 21 13:04:26 2004 From: mgrantwich at yahoo.com (Magda Grantwich) Date: Sun, 21 Nov 2004 05:04:26 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: The length of the Pensieve Scene In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041121130426.53278.qmail@web53103.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 118276 --- curlyhornedsnorkack wrote: >> As for exposing Remus' secret: the person who did that was Sirius >> Black, one of his closest friends, and that apparently happened >> in the next school year, according to canon. > > I can't remember this - where is it? Are you referring to the part > in POA where Sirius admits luring Snape into a trap? > If so: > It's possible that Sirius could have tried to solve the Snape > problem > by having Snape be bitten by a werewolf. If he did not die he would > become a werewolf, and Snape, who would be in the same position as > Lupin, would lose his compulsion to expose Lupin as a werewolf. > [snip] > I haven't actually written anywhere that I think Snape deserved > what > happened to him, but I have provided a realistic motive besides > boredom for the Marauders. There is a difference between "motive" > and > "excuse". Also, I am not condemning Snape, I am suspecting him of > spying. Snape could think he's spying for the good of Hogwarts! > After > all, even Lupin said no parent would want a werewolf in the school. > > "curlyhornedsnorkack" > Snape didn't know that Lupin was a werewolf until he saw him during the Prank, when he and James were in the tunnel. Where did you get the idea that Snape already knew? Magda __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Meet the all-new My Yahoo! - Try it today! http://my.yahoo.com From mgrantwich at yahoo.com Sun Nov 21 13:19:36 2004 From: mgrantwich at yahoo.com (Magda Grantwich) Date: Sun, 21 Nov 2004 05:19:36 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: The length of the Pensieve Scene In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041121131936.58861.qmail@web53110.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 118277 --- dumbledore11214 wrote: > Curlyhornedsnorkack: > Since Lupin and Sirius are adults in the fire scene, they would > probably realize that Snape's action of following the Marauders > wouldn't have excused their actions towards Snape. Also, they might > realize that trying to excuse themselves by blaming Snape for their > cruelty would be a bad example for a teenager. Besides, since > Snape is in the OOTP, it would not be in the Order's interest for > them to exacerbate bad feeling for Snape. > > Alla: > Oh, I am so glad that someone else is thinking that it is a > possibility that Marauders' actions towards Snape had some other > possible reasons besides boredom. Curly, I like your explanation, > but I think that even simpler one exists - the reasons for > animosity > between Snape and Marauders are not supposed to be revealed yet, it > is just too early. > > Yes, Remus and Sirius did not tell Harry. It is just as frustrating > as Harry not asking questions about his parents, but Rowling has to > have some surprises up her sleeve yet. She knocked James from his > Saint!Pedestal. In the next books it will be Snape turn, me thinks. Let me get this straight: Curly says that Sirius and Remus lied to Harry about their motives because they recognize as adults that the motives were not good ones, and Alla thinks this means they were telling the truth????? And Remus and Sirius ADMIT that it was because Sirius said he was bored. How is that in any way debatable? Waiting for an interpreter of that analysis.... > > Magda previously: > Sirius is maddenly imprecise about when Snape started trying to > get them expelled - notice that it doesn't come up in his > description of James and Snape to Harry. If he tried to get them > expelled after what we see in the pensieve, I would find it hard to > condemn Snape for that. > > > Alla: > > Ummm, are you saying that pensieve encounter was their first > episode EVER? Lily did not seem to think that. Sirius infamous > comment about Snape suggests that they knew each other way before > the fifth year, IMO. > I disagree, I think A LOT happened before Pensieve scene and A LOT > after it, but this is mainly speculation, of course. How can you so completely misinterpret what I said? I said that Snape tried to get James and Group expelled after what they did to him in the Pensieve incident, then it's understandable why Snape would do that. Sirius doesn't ever say WHEN Snape tried to get them expelled. If he only started trying to get them expelled AFTER they'd bullied him, then he had damn good reason and if the Marauders didn't like it, then they could - ooo! brainwave! - stop bullying him! Now there's a thought! Magda __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? The all-new My Yahoo! - Get yours free! http://my.yahoo.com From azriona at juno.com Sun Nov 21 12:36:58 2004 From: azriona at juno.com (Sharon) Date: Sun, 21 Nov 2004 12:36:58 -0000 Subject: Unfortunate!Peter In-Reply-To: <750698FD-3BB0-11D9-92A8-000A9577CB94@btconnect.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118278 > > azirona: > There are as many motivations as there are stars in the sky. > Blackmail, torture, ransom, cash reward, fear, love, resentment, > reason (I mean, maybe Peter really did think Voldy was right), or > even the idea that Peter has been working for DD since the first day > at school. > > > > Kneasy: > Yes, there are. How many would apply to Peter, particularly if he got > into DD's clutches while still at school? Only two that I can think of > - idealism and fear. And I don't trust idealists. > Actually, depending on how you look at the situation, I think all of those motivations could apply to Peter. It depends on how you spin it: A quote from PoA, Chapter 19 'The Servant of Lord Voldemort': "You sold Lily and James to Voldemort," said Black, who was shaking too. "Do you deny it?" "Sirius, Sirius, what could I have done? The Dark Lord...you have no idea...he has weapons you can't imagine...I was scared, Sirius, I was never brave like you and Remus and James. I never meant it to happen...He-Who-Must-Be-Named forced me..." "He - he was taking over everywhere!" gasped Pettigrew. "Wh-what was there to be gained by refusing him?" "You don't understand!" whined Pettigrew. "He would have killed me, Sirius!" Okay, let's begin: Blackmail: "He has weapons..." It's one of Peter's first lines of defense, really. Be quiet, Sirius, he's got weapons, he's got power you don't understand. Implied is that Peter has even seen these weapons at work and therefore knows first hand. Why? Would he have seen Voldy use them on others? From OoP, Chp 5 "The Order of the Phoenix" - "Voldemort doesn't march up to people's houses and bang on their front doors, Harry," said Sirius. "He tricks, jinxes, and blackmails them." It is entirely possible that Voldemort blackmailed Peter into working for him. Why - again, can't tell you. But it's pretty easy to come up with reasons. (Holding family members hostage. Holding information hostage. Threatening with a much worse fate for James & Lily if Peter doesn't cooperate.) Torture: Peter out and out tells Sirius that his life was on the line. Voldemort would have killed him for non-compliance. Now, we're talking about a bad guy here from the classic line-up of bad guys, who before they deliver the killing blow to their adversaries, decides to torture them a bit first. (I mean, really. How many people actually read the graveyard scene without thinking of every bad James Bond movie in existance?) Voldy couldn't have grabbed Peter and said, "Hey, bud, go find out where James & Lily are hiding and tell me, or I'll kill you." Heck no. There had to be some *motivation* in there. Voldy probably did quite a Cruciatus number on Peter first. Ransom: Interesting, isn't it, that Sirius actually uses the word "sold" when making his official accusation of Peter in the Shrieking Shack. *Sold*...not 'betrayed', not 'turned them in', not 'handed over'. *Sold*. As if there was an actual exchange of...something, for that information that Peter had as Secret Keeper. (This could probably play into an ESE!Sirius theory, but I'd rather steer clear of that for the moment.) What possibly could be so important and wonderful to Peter that he would be willing to betray his friends and cause the death of their son just to get his hands on it? Power? Money? Fame? The first and last are cetainly things that Peter didn't have before - he willingly admits that he's not as powerful as the rest of his friends, and before the events at GH he certainly wasn't the most well-known - at least, not for the right things. How ironic it would be had Peter turned in Lily and James because he wanted fame, because it's actually what he ended up getting - except he could hardly enjoy it, seeing as the fame was supposed to be posthomous! Cash Reward: Which sort of goes in with ransom. Actually, I do think this one is the least likely of the possibilities, and I can find more reasons to argue against it than for it. But think for a moment...here's Peter, who has been watching James create a life for himself, barely twenty, wife and child and home in the country, and there's Remus, the opposite end of the spectrum, poor and alone and probably pretty unemployable due to his lycanthropy...Peter, as the impartial observer, may have seen the unfairness of it all and thought to play a bit of Robin Hood. Take from Voldy and give to Remus (or keep for himself), and here's this lovely piece of information that will not only bring James down a notch or two. Because of course James is too strong to be killed. He'd defied the Dark Lord three times already, right? "I never meant for this to happen," says Peter. He didn't think James would have to gall to go and *die*. And what's one baby more or less...right? Fear: Oh, the easiest of them all, of course. Because the one emotion that is a constant, every time we see Peter (and even some of the time that we see him as Scabbers) is fear. Fear of death, fear of life, fear of Sirius, fear of Voldy, fear of Nagini, fear of dark shadows, fear of light shadows. Peter is probably scared of chocolate biscuits, too. "I was never brave like you and Remus and James," says Peter. Fear is a powerful thing. Peter obviously never learned about FDR. Love: Well, it is what the whole series seems to be centered on, if you listen to Dumbledore, anyway. And there is that whole Stockholm Syndrome thing (which I will be up front and say I don't quite buy myself, so I'll make a very poor argument for it). But there is every possibility that Peter does feel some sort of...(ugh, I hate to even type it) obligation, if you will, to Voldemort. And Voldy himself continually tells Peter "You're scared of me, you regret coming back to me, you wish I was gone." If all of that is true - why did Peter go back in the first place? What made Peter return? Fear wouldn't have pulled him back - in fact, it should have pushed him away. And while you may argue that being an accomplished Leglimens, Voldy would of course *know* what Peter was thinking...well, being an accomplished Leglimens, wouldn't Voldy also attempt to *alter* what Peter is thinking as well? Perhaps Voldy telling Peter how hated he is isn't so much reinforcing what Peter already beleives as it is trying to convince Peter of the opposite. Resentment: Oh, loads of resentment in Peter. "I was never brave *like you*"... It can't feel good to know that you're constantly compared to your friends, constantly seen as the tag-a-long. "That fat little boy," Rosmerta calls him (PoA, Chp 10). "Never quite in their league...I was quite sharp with him," says McGonagall (ibid). No one is so stupid as not to know when you're being treated differently than those close to you. Peter knew that James and Sirius were made much of by teachers and contemporaries alike. And when even your Head of House sees you as the numbskull, while your friends are patronized as saints (and are hardly even close to it), it can't make you feel good. Did Peter have reason to resent James and Sirius. You betcha. Did it turn him to the Death Eaters for confirmation of his abilities? Maybe. Reason (or Idealism, as you put it): What's Voldemort's plan here, really? Is it that he wants to wipe out the Muggle from the face of the planet entirely, or just make sure that the pureblooded wizards are still taken seriously? I mean, maybe Voldy isn't so much Adolf Hitler as he is just a rather militant branch of the Daughters of the American Revolution. Seriously - you think the DAR is all good and cheerful and stuff, but they so much stock in bloodlines and family trees it makes the Black Family Tapestry look like a second grade homework assignment. Is it that Voldemort is really against Muggles and Mudbloods - or is he just worried that an important distinction within the wizarding world is being lost? Remember, he himself is a Halfblood. By definition, he's a Mudblood! And he is not unintelligent (had he been so, he would never have gotten as far, nor would he have been a prefect at Hogwarts). He himself must know that after several generations, remaining purely with pureblooded families will cause serious inbreeding, and that also after a few generations, the new blood that marrying Halfbloods and Muggles will create stronger, better, more powerful wizards. As well, *those* wizards could consider themselves pureblooded wizards, as their parents and grandparents and great-grandparents were wizards as well. Is Voldemort really saying that he wants all Halfbloods and Muggles gone - or is he just trying to preserve a world in which wizards and Muggles live seperate lives - which isn't all that bad of an idea, after all. The more Muggles who know about wizards, the worse off the wizards will be. Even a few of the "good" wizards have admitted as such to Harry. And perhaps it was this theory that Peter believed in. The meathod of course, was probably a bit too violent for his liking, but the ideals remained the same. Sirius' parents, after all, believed in Voldy's cause but did not participate. Perhaps at one point, Peter was the same - and then was roped in before he had a chance to say 'no'. Working for DD from Day One: All wizards, according to Sirius, are related to each other, if you go back far enough. And we don't know very much about Peter's or Dumbledore's ancestry, do we? (Except that DD is not related to Harry. Thank ye gods, had it turned out that DD was Lily's long lost grandfather I would have jumped off a bridge or something.) There is every possibility that Peter and DD go waaaaay back. Maybe being related is a bit of a stretch - but that they would have had some sort of knowledge of each other isn't unlikely. And this whole theory goes so much hand-in-hand with the DoubleAgent! Peter theory, I can't go into much without going into *that*, and this entry is already horrendously long, so I will stop there, and maybe expound on that another day. --az From vmonte at yahoo.com Sun Nov 21 15:24:23 2004 From: vmonte at yahoo.com (vmonte) Date: Sun, 21 Nov 2004 15:24:23 -0000 Subject: Prophecies and fate; writing what you don't believe (was:The Second Prophecy) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118279 Hickengruendler wrote: That is what I think, too, for two reasons. The first reason is, that she said she worded the prophecy very carefully, which to me highly suggests that the meaning is not quite as obvious as it wseems to be. But there's also a clear hint in the book, IMO. Firenze says in his lesson basically, that the abilities of the humans to read the future are limited and that they often interprete the signs wrongly. I do not think it's by accident that JKR put this in the book, which in his end had a prophecy whose content seemed to be a bit obvious (at least for us readers. I disagree with the fans who think, that Harry shouldn't be surprised). vmonte responds: I don't believe in the prophecy either. I also think that the prophecy seems to have thrown Dumbledore off his game. Dumbledore always seems to know a lot more than he should, except for the prophecy. I'm still inclined to think that Trelawny is a fraud. Doesn't the prophecy call Voldemort The Dark Lord--sounds like something a DE would utter. Is it possible that someone else is manipulating Trelawny? We've already seen curses/spells that can manipulate wizards into doing many things, why wouldn't someone use her for their own purposes. If I were a true villain I would use Trelawny in order to keep Dumbledore and Voldemort occupied while I carried on my own secret plans for domination. I think that someone (behind the scenes) is interested in that power, but they have realized that they first need to get rid of 3 problems: Dumbledore, Voldemort and Harry. It's interesting how the prophecy plays right into Voldemort's worst fear--his mortality, and Dumbledore's fear--of losing Harry Potter. Could it have been created by someone really smart? Someone who knew these two people intimately, and was playing to their worst fears? Hopefully, Harry will realize that he is in charge of his own destiny. From HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com Sun Nov 21 16:02:05 2004 From: HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com (HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com) Date: 21 Nov 2004 16:02:05 -0000 Subject: Reminder - Weekly Chat Message-ID: <1101052925.19.25494.m23@yahoogroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 118280 We would like to remind you of this upcoming event. Weekly Chat Date: Sunday, November 21, 2004 Time: 11:00AM CST (GMT-06:00) Don't forget, chat happens today, 11 am Pacific, 2 pm Eastern, 7 pm UK time. Chat times do not change for Daylight Saving/Summer Time. Chat generally goes on for about 5 hours, but can last as long as people want it to last. Go into any Yahoo chat room and type: /join HP:1 Hope to see you there! From Snarryfan at aol.com Sun Nov 21 12:02:45 2004 From: Snarryfan at aol.com (evita2fr) Date: Sun, 21 Nov 2004 12:02:45 -0000 Subject: Oh look! The riddle! Again! Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118281 I'm sure it was already done, but show me a subject never done before *smile* It just a little thing I saw, and I could look it more in another post, but: "Fourth, the second left and the second on the right Are twins once you taste them, though different at first sight." Could it mean: In the fourth book==> GOF The seconds ==> officier in second, the men just under the boss, so under Dumbledore. Left and Right ==> Snape and McGonagall, on the Foe-Glass. Different at first sight ==> Gryffindor/Slytherin, Nice/Mean,etc... Are twins ==> In the same side. Could be a clue that Snape with the good guys. Safe if Minerva is ESE, of course. Yeah, I'll make a better and complet post later, even if it's stretched. Christelle From stbjohn2 at yahoo.com Sun Nov 21 14:44:46 2004 From: stbjohn2 at yahoo.com (stbjohn2) Date: Sun, 21 Nov 2004 14:44:46 -0000 Subject: Muggleborns choosing WW In-Reply-To: <001b01c4cf50$1b45a960$704b6d51@f3b7j4> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118282 Sandy wrote: >Maybe I'm just stuck in Muggle thought processes, but I don't see >that most wizarding jobs are all that much different from their >Muggle counterparts, or "stripped of the unpleasant part of work." >Teachers still have to plan lessons, grade papers and keep an eye out >for the exploding cauldron or stray spell that turns a student into a >water buffalo or causes their teeth to grow like a beaver's; civil >servants still have to deal with paperwork and red tape; shop keepers >have to be physically present during business hours, etc. Ffred replied: > I'm sure you didn't mean to imply that Muggle teachers have to deal with those eventualities (a fascinating thought if they did)! Sandy: I simply meant to imply WW teachers have the same tasks as RL teachers, plus, of course, the extra duty of monitoring students who can take a little magical knowledge and use it the wrong way. (And I suspect many RL teachers would be happy to deal with a bat bogey hex over the sort of RL dangerous things kids do.) Ffred: > But no, I'm not implying that work doesn't _exist_ in the WW, just that we haven't seen any canon evidence for useless or alienating work. Sandy: Well, maybe I'm misunderstanding what you mean about "useless or alienating work." You snipped my example of the apparently bored and unhappy receptionist at St. Mungos, who seems like she's just absolutely had enough of dealing with people suffering from magical maladies. And I'd add the bored security guard who checks Harry's wand before the hearing -- spending most of his day reading the paper. Neither of these people seem any more happy with their work than your average WalMart clerk. I've got nothing against work, and think people are happiest when they have something useful to do. But I don't think JKR is trying to show us that the WW world is a utopia where everyone has the absolutely perfect job for their talents and personality. (You need look no farther than the faculty at Hogwarts, where a huge percentage -- including Snape, Trelawney, Binns and Hagrid-as-teacher, as well as four out of five DADA teachers -- are really not suited for the job.) Sandy, snipped again: >You can't just conjure up a flying broom, someone still has the tedious-sounding job of picking out the right sticks and twigs and putting them together properly, as well as adding the appropriate charms to guarantee it flies, is balanced and will brake when needed. An assembly line job to create a >magical product. Ffred: > Maybe a broom maker takes enormous pride in putting together the right sticks and twigs and it's a closely guarded craft secret, of course... This once again isn't something which canon tells us. _Are_ broomsticks made on an assembly line by miserable workers each of whom has the task of installing one particular twig, or are they made individually by time served craftswizards in a workshop, each signed by the person who produced them? (Coinage has the individual mark of the producer, but that's made by goblins so it would be risky to extend that analogy). Sandy: Well, I saw a bit on HGTV not long ago about a father and son team who do just that. I'm not sure if their brooms are for show or actually can be used to sweep the front porch Anyway, broommaking may in fact be a true art -- that would account for the high price of brooms. Perhaps cauldron making would have been a better example, since there seems to be a problem with shoddily made cauldrons. You're right, we don't really have any canon on wizard manufacturing (and in fact I wonder if wizards don't count on muggle manufacturing for a wealth of items, from the muggle clothing the kids wear to furniture and canned foods, but as you say, there's no canon either way). > Siriusly Snapey Susan, who, after viewing photos of the PoA launch party in London, wants to take some scissors to some of these young men's hair! Sandy: Oh, but long hair is SO canon. Think about it, everyone we really like to write about here has long hair -- Snape's is described as shoulder length, and Sirius and Lupin are both described as having long hair. I don't think JKR actually calls James'"long" but since he likes it to look windblown, it's not a crewcut for sure. And DD and Bill Weasley are on the superlong bandwagon. (I think JKR is just giving a nod to her/my generation with the long hair on cool guys thing). Sandy From azriona at juno.com Sun Nov 21 15:27:21 2004 From: azriona at juno.com (Sharon) Date: Sun, 21 Nov 2004 15:27:21 -0000 Subject: Revisiting the Black family tree In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118283 Alshain: > For all that pure-bloods are said to be rare, there seems to be a lot > of them dotted throughout the books. Unfortunately I don't have a > degree in genetics, so I can't tell how many generations of > intermarriage it would take for thirty-ish families to produce a gene > pool so uniform that fresh blood would become necessary. What I'm > dead certain about, however, is that the WW must have its Capulets > and its Montagues, families that wouldn't interbreed even if their > survival depended on it. Probably the case indeed. But just because the families are all interrelated doesn't mean they're all resting on the weight of a single tree trunk. I prefer to think of the entire family tree concept (not just in the Wizarding World but life in general) as a forest of trees, where the trunks and lower halves (more recent family members) are completely on their own and by themselves. It's only when you get to the upper branches, farther from the ground (and farther back into the family's ancestry) that the branches become tangled. I mean, look at it this way - if you go back far enough, everyone on the *planet* is related. You might be a cousin of mine! It's just that some families - such as the Blacks, apparently - are more conscious of their ancestry and family members than others. Sirius, for instance, knows who his second cousins are (even knowing the definition of second-cousin-one-removed). How many people actually know that sort of thing? >Alshain: > At the same time JKR retains some mystery; if the Black family tree > isn't conclusive, other pureblood players can still enter the scene > with or without family connections. I think they still can. As far as we know, Snape isn't closely related to the Blacks - Harry would have noticed his name straight off, along with Draco's. And I would assume that unless someone mentions it, any family connection there is to the Blacks would be so distant that it's not worth bothering with. Sirius didn't bring up Arthur and Molly as, "And oh yes, I'm related to them and them and them and them." It was more of an explanatory thing, a "for instance". --az From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Sun Nov 21 16:55:03 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Sun, 21 Nov 2004 16:55:03 -0000 Subject: The length of the Pensieve Scene In-Reply-To: <20041121131936.58861.qmail@web53110.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118284 Magda: > How can you so completely misinterpret what I said? I said that > Snape tried to get James and Group expelled after what they did to > him in the Pensieve incident, then it's understandable why Snape > would do that. Sirius doesn't ever say WHEN Snape tried to get them > expelled. If he only started trying to get them expelled AFTER > they'd bullied him, then he had damn good reason and if the Marauders > didn't like it, then they could - ooo! brainwave! - stop bullying > him! Now there's a thought! Alla: Huh? Yes, if Snape tried to do it AFTER Pensieve Accident, then I would perfectly understand it. I understood what you said, but to me the logical assumption from that would be that PRIOR to Pensieve accident Snape did not do ANYTHING to Marauders just as they did not do anything to him. I doubted that. I brought Sirius "he knew more curses...blah,blah,blah" as example that he for some unknown reason paid close attention to Snape since their first year. I believe that Snape started following them around MUCH earlier than Pensieve accident. Do I have much proof for it? Nope, as you said we are fuzzy on the timeframe indeed, but to me there are enough hints to think this way. I could be wrong, you could be right, but I am not sure how I misinterpreted what you said. From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Sun Nov 21 17:03:37 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Sun, 21 Nov 2004 17:03:37 -0000 Subject: The length of the Pensieve Scene In-Reply-To: <20041121131936.58861.qmail@web53110.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118285 Magda: > Let me get this straight: Curly says that Sirius and Remus lied to > Harry about their motives because they recognize as adults that the > motives were not good ones, and Alla thinks this means they were > telling the truth????? And Remus and Sirius ADMIT that it was > because Sirius said he was bored. How is that in any way debatable? > > Waiting for an interpreter of that analysis.... Alla: NO, Magda. What Alla says is that Remus and Sirius were telling the truth, but not WHOLE truth, that besides Sirius' boredom they may have OTHER, ADDITIONAL motives for their encounters . What Alla also says that it is to early to reveal the whole truth for plot reasons. :o) I don't see why it is so implausible to imagine, if we can imagine some very noble motives...hmmm let's say for Snape to treat Harry the way he does. From quigonginger at yahoo.com Sun Nov 21 18:11:30 2004 From: quigonginger at yahoo.com (quigonginger) Date: Sun, 21 Nov 2004 18:11:30 -0000 Subject: Muggleborns choosing WW In-Reply-To: <001b01c4cf50$1b45a960$704b6d51@f3b7j4> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118286 Ffred wondered: >You can't just conjure > >up a flying broom, someone still has the tedious-sounding job of picking > >out the right sticks and twigs and putting them together properly, as > >well as adding the appropriate charms to guarantee it flies, is > >balanced and will brake when needed. An assembly line job to create a > >magical product. > > Maybe a broom maker takes enormous pride in putting together the right > sticks and twigs and it's a closely guarded craft secret, of course... This > once again isn't something which canon tells us. _Are_ broomsticks made on > an assembly line by miserable workers each of whom has the task of > installing one particular twig, or are they made individually by time served > craftswizards in a workshop, each signed by the person who produced them? > (Coinage has the individual mark of the producer, but that's made by goblins > so it would be risky to extend that analogy). Ginger chimes in: It's not exactly stated, but QA seems to imply that broom making started out as an individual job, but then moved to assembly style. Pp. 48 & 49 tell of the different kinds of brooms, mentioning specifically that the Silver Arrow, like the Moontrimmer or Oakshaft, was the work of a single wizard and demand outstripped supply. In the next paragraph, JKR says "A breakthrough occurred" when the Ollerton brothers started the Cleansweep Broom Company, which produced brooms "in numbers never seen before". This would seem to indicate mass production. For what it's worth, Ginger From khinterberg at yahoo.com Sun Nov 21 18:17:46 2004 From: khinterberg at yahoo.com (khinterberg) Date: Sun, 21 Nov 2004 18:17:46 -0000 Subject: Revisiting the Black family tree In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118287 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "alshainofthenorth" wrote: > > Hi, > > When Sirius says that all pure-blooded families are inter-related, > people usually tend to take it literally and infer that every old > family we've seen in the books so far has to be on the Black family > tree. I'd like to challenge this conception a bit and at the same > time check if I'm reading more into the text than what is actually > there (then again, this wouldn't be unusual in HPFGU either), and > save the family tree from breaking under the weight. Basically I'm > viewing it as equal parts of generalisation and hyperbole. > > For all that pure-bloods are said to be rare, there seems to be a lot > of them dotted throughout the books. The Blacks, the Crouches, the > Lestranges and the Malfoys are explicitly pure-blooded, the Fudges > probably so as well (assuming that Cornelius isn't just projecting > his own insecurities when he's placing overmuch importance on blood > purity), the Longbottoms, the Snapes as per JKR, the Death Eater > families -- Crabbes, Goyles, Notts, Mulcibers, Traverses, Rosiers, > Wilkeses. Several possible others, including but not limited to > Weasleys, Flints, Bletchleys, Warringtons, Bulstrodes, Derricks, > Boles, Higgses, Montagues, Zabinis, Parkinsons, Puceys, Browns, > Cornfoots, Greengrasses, and MacDougals. Unfortunately I don't have a > degree in genetics, so I can't tell how many generations of > intermarriage it would take for thirty-ish families to produce a gene > pool so uniform that fresh blood would become necessary. What I'm > dead certain about, however, is that the WW must have its Capulets > and its Montagues, families that wouldn't interbreed even if their > survival depended on it. > > I tend to interpret Sirius' words as meaning "All pureblood families > are interrelated, though not necessarily all with one another. My > mother would have thrown a wobbler if I'd married Lucia Zabini. Or > Edith Bulstrode. Or Lavinia Higgs. And imagine having to be related > to Snape, even if it was by marriage." Why doesn't he say so > outright? Because that isn't the purpose of the exchange and would > overshadow the crucial point, establishing the family ties between > the Blacks and the Malfoys, that Kreacher may have other loyalties > than his master, and that he'll at one point take orders from other > family members. > > At the same time JKR retains some mystery; if the Black family tree > isn't conclusive, other pureblood players can still enter the scene > with or without family connections. (Though I wish she wouldn't be so > inventive with funny names and stick to working with what she already > has instead. It struck me when checking the chocolate frog cards at > the Lexicon that the family names in modern magical society are > entirely absent from historical accounts. Surely there must have been > medieval Malfoys, Blacks, Snapes or Longbottoms who distinguished > themselves enough to be mentioned in History of Magic or on chocolate > frog cards? But that's beside the point.) > > Alshain khinterberg here: I just wanted to mention that JKR has not actually said that Snape is a pureblood, she just said that he isn't muggleborn. Audience member: 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!" From quigonginger at yahoo.com Sun Nov 21 18:30:19 2004 From: quigonginger at yahoo.com (quigonginger) Date: Sun, 21 Nov 2004 18:30:19 -0000 Subject: FILK: Raw Liver Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118288 When Harry stayed at the Leaky Caudlron in the beginning of PoA, he noticed a hag ordering a plate of raw liver from behind a thick, woolen balaclava. No one stopped to converse with her, but had they done so, this is what she may have said: "Raw Liver" to the tune of "Moon River" by Andy Williams To Gail, who's Back and Filking! Never lose this addiction, girlfriend! The Hag: Raw liver, tender as a child. An organ most reviled, they say. Oh, cow innards, a true winner. Wherever they serve you, I'm going to stay. Raw liver sets my heart a-whirl. No boca or tofu for me. My kid-eating days at an end, No gnawing on a friend, My entree I defend. Raw liver and me. I believe the recording repeats the whole thing. But the Lions are on, so just scroll up. I'm off to watch football. Ginger, wishing she knew how to get that ' thingie over the one e in entree. From mgrantwich at yahoo.com Sun Nov 21 18:31:46 2004 From: mgrantwich at yahoo.com (Magda Grantwich) Date: Sun, 21 Nov 2004 10:31:46 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: The length of the Pensieve Scene In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041121183146.75303.qmail@web53103.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 118289 --- dumbledore11214 wrote: >Alla: > > NO, Magda. What Alla says is that Remus and Sirius were telling the > truth, but not WHOLE truth, that besides Sirius' boredom they may > have OTHER, ADDITIONAL motives for their encounters . > What Alla also says that it is to early to reveal the whole truth > for plot reasons. :o) Sooo.....Sirius and Remus want to reassure Harry that his father was not a jerk so they tell part of the truth, the part with the insufficient, inadequate reasons ("he was 15" "school cool" "arrogant birks") and DON'T tell him the better reasons? Why would they do that? Magda __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Sun Nov 21 18:37:40 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Sun, 21 Nov 2004 18:37:40 -0000 Subject: The length of the Pensieve Scene In-Reply-To: <20041121183146.75303.qmail@web53103.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118290 Magda: Sooo.....Sirius and Remus want to reassure Harry that his father was not a jerk so they tell part of the truth, the part with the insufficient, inadequate reasons ("he was 15" "school cool" "arrogant > birks") and DON'T tell him the better reasons? Why would they do that? Alla: For the same reason Harry does not ask questions about his parents even though he stays in Grimmauld Place with Sirius and Remus for quite along periods of time, because JKR does not want to reveal them yet. For the same reason Dumbledore keeps telling Harry and readers that he trusts severus Snape and not telling why - because JKR does not want to reveal the whole story yet. For the same reason Dumbledore did not tell Harry and readers the whole story why he did not try to kill VOldemort in the MOM battle - because it is too early in the plot. From mgrantwich at yahoo.com Sun Nov 21 18:48:03 2004 From: mgrantwich at yahoo.com (Magda Grantwich) Date: Sun, 21 Nov 2004 10:48:03 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Unfortunate!Peter In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041121184803.91466.qmail@web53102.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 118291 --- Barry Arrowsmith wrote: > Add to this the fact that at the Shrieking Shack it took > two wizards wielding two wands simultaneously to switch him back to > human form and I begin to suspect that Peter has been spelled. He > might not even be in animagus form at all, he could have been > transfigured. > Entertaining post, Kneasy. I just take issue with this one point. Remus and Sirius don't de-animagus Peter together because it takes two wizards to overcome the spell but rather as a sign of their renewed friendship. "Together?" "I think so..." Sirius certainly didn't assume that he needed another person to help him because he hadn't made any arrangements for another wizard to be there. And the decision for both to do it happened very late in the proceedings. Magda __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Meet the all-new My Yahoo! - Try it today! http://my.yahoo.com From stbjohn2 at yahoo.com Sun Nov 21 17:59:19 2004 From: stbjohn2 at yahoo.com (stbjohn2) Date: Sun, 21 Nov 2004 17:59:19 -0000 Subject: Revisiting the Black family tree In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118292 Alshain wrote: > > Hi, > > When Sirius says that all pure-blooded families are inter-related, > people usually tend to take it literally and infer that every old > family we've seen in the books so far has to be on the Black family > tree. I'd like to challenge this conception a bit and at the same > time check if I'm reading more into the text than what is actually > there (then again, this wouldn't be unusual in HPFGU either), and > save the family tree from breaking under the weight. Basically I'm > viewing it as equal parts of generalisation and hyperbole. Sandy -- I took it as generalization and hyperbole too, and interpret it to mean "all pureblood families of a certain social class (rich) and political persuasion (leaning to the dark, purebloods-are- superior side) are inter-related" Alshain: > > For all that pure-bloods are said to be rare, there seems to be a lot > of them dotted throughout the books. [snip] > the Snapes as per JKR, [and lots more snips] Sandy: Are you basing that Snape is pureblood on her comments at Edinburgh? Because the way I read those remarks, she basically stood on her head to avoid commenting on whether Snape was pureblood. She confirmed he wasn't a mudblood (that wasn't exactly a surprise) then rambled for a long time on unrelated matter before stating something along the line of "there are clues to his background in the books." As with all JKR clues, they can be interpeted either way, so apparently his heritage will be important at some time, and will then become clear. (When she was asked a similar question about Lupin's background she gave a simple declarative answer "he's half-blood," so it's not like she isn't willing to tell us anyone's heritage, as long as it suits her purpose.) Sandy From eggplant9998 at yahoo.com Sun Nov 21 21:03:36 2004 From: eggplant9998 at yahoo.com (eggplant9998) Date: Sun, 21 Nov 2004 21:03:36 -0000 Subject: Harry mastering his emotions in HPB (was: Plot in OotP) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118293 Alla wrote: > I am keeping my fingers crossed that > Harry will save Snape's life. If he did Snape would just sneer and say "Well Potter I see you're trying to play the hero again, be sure to alert the media." No I have a better cliffhanger to end the next book with: Snape and Harry are having the worst fight yet, it looks like they are about to come to blows when suddenly Voldemort appears and sends a lethal curse toward Harry. Without hesitation Snape jumps in front of Harry and received the curse instead, he saves Harry's life but dies instantly in the process. Harry now feels guilty for all the terrible things he called Snape just a few seconds ago, but mainly Harry is puzzled; why did Snape, a man full of hate, sacrifice himself for me. You'll have to wait for book 7 to find out. Eggplant From brianna_hp at yahoo.com Sun Nov 21 19:21:21 2004 From: brianna_hp at yahoo.com (Brianna HP) Date: Sun, 21 Nov 2004 11:21:21 -0800 (PST) Subject: Revisiting the Black family tree In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041121192121.55036.qmail@web61304.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 118294 Alshain: > Unfortunately I don't have a degree in genetics, so I can't tell how many generations of intermarriage it would take for thirty-ish families to produce a gene pool so uniform that fresh blood would become necessary. What I'm dead certain about, however, is that the WW must have its Capulets and its Montagues, families that wouldn't interbreed even if their survival depended on it. Brianna: Well, from my research, it seems that the mention of the family tree is to echo the account of the grail keepers family in some of the Grail tales. I even saw a place in France that has a tapestry family tree of the descent of the family. What I make of it isn't a genetic thing, but that the "pure bloods" are confused about the meaning of "pure blood." Some clues that got me to this point included the container of apparently blood in the Black house hold. It was just so striking. Then the tapestry scene came. From foxmoth at qnet.com Sun Nov 21 22:22:41 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Sun, 21 Nov 2004 22:22:41 -0000 Subject: The length of the Pensieve Scene In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118295 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "dumbledore11214" wrote: > > Magda: > > Sooo.....Sirius and Remus want to reassure Harry that his father was not a jerk so they tell part of the truth, the part with the > insufficient, inadequate reasons ("he was 15" "school cool" "arrogant birks") and DON'T tell him the better reasons? > Why would they do that? > > > Alla: > > For the same reason Harry does not ask questions about his parents even though he stays in Grimmauld Place with Sirius and Remus for quite along periods of time, because JKR does not want to reveal them yet.< > Pippin: Of course JKR has to hide things for plot reasons, but she always throws in a character reason too. Lupin does not want to talk about the past (PoA ch 12) , Moody's casual attitude to mayhem and destruction is upsetting, and Sirius has the sullens a good deal of the time when Harry is at GP. Harry isn't the sort to bring up something that might depress him, though he does regret it later. Anyway, I think there is an interpretation being missed here. When Sirius says "I'm not proud of it," and JKR underlines that by having Lupin give him a quick look, it's because there's been a change. In the Shrieking Shack, Sirius defended his attack on Snape "It served him right. Sneaking around, trying to find out what we were up to...hoping he could get us expelled." But Sirius has grown up a bit in the two years since he said that, and though he still doesn't like Snape, he's not blaming the victim any longer. Harry doesn't notice this because he's invested in seeing Sirius as the victim of Snape's goading, but Sirius has started to outgrow his old feelings toward Snape. Pippin From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Sun Nov 21 22:43:34 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Sun, 21 Nov 2004 22:43:34 -0000 Subject: The length of the Pensieve Scene In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118296 > Pippin: snip. > Anyway, I think there is an interpretation being missed here. > When Sirius says "I'm not proud of it," and JKR underlines that by > having Lupin give him a quick look, it's because there's been a > change. In the Shrieking Shack, Sirius defended his attack on > Snape "It served him right. Sneaking around, trying to find out > what we were up to...hoping he could get us expelled." > > But Sirius has grown up a bit in the two years since he said that, > and though he still doesn't like Snape, he's not blaming the > victim any longer. Harry doesn't notice this because he's > invested in seeing Sirius as the victim of Snape's goading, but > Sirius has started to outgrow his old feelings toward Snape. Alla: Well, I stated earlier that the only reason Sirius said "serves him right" in the Shack is because he just left Azkaban and his worst feelings were replayed over and over again in his head for twelve years. That to me also meant that their animosity must have been more serious than we can assume. Regardless, Sirius' not blaming Snape anymore does not sound to me as mutually exclusive to the (mainly speculative, but also based on some inferences, which I also stated before) possibility that Snape also did his fair share of nasty things to Marauders. From foxmoth at qnet.com Sun Nov 21 22:57:20 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Sun, 21 Nov 2004 22:57:20 -0000 Subject: The length of the Pensieve Scene In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118297 > Alla: > > Well, I stated earlier that the only reason Sirius said "serves him right" in the Shack is because he just left Azkaban and his worst feelings were replayed over and over again in his head for twelve years. > That to me also meant that their animosity must have been more serious than we can assume.< Pippin: Or it could mean that he hadn't had a chance to reconsider his feelings about Snape, because the dementors were leaving him with the memories of much worse things, like Voldemort's reign of terror. Alla: > Regardless, Sirius' not blaming Snape anymore does not sound to me as mutually exclusive to the (mainly speculative, but also based on some inferences, which I also stated before) possibility that Snape also did his fair share of nasty things to Marauders.< Pippin: So, if Sirius sank to Snape's level, that makes it better somehow? I don't think so. Maybe Sirius never used Dark Arts (though using a werewolf as the tool of revenge is certainly dark enough for me) but that just makes him like Crouch Sr, justifying his ruthless measures by the ruthlessness of others. Not a pretty picture. Pippin From juli17 at aol.com Sun Nov 21 23:02:07 2004 From: juli17 at aol.com (juli17 at aol.com) Date: Sun, 21 Nov 2004 18:02:07 EST Subject: The resolution of Snape (was Re: Harry mastering his emotions in Message-ID: <103.54ef1f5d.2ed2786f@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 118298 In a message dated 11/21/2004 3:29:53 AM Pacific Standard Time, HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com writes: > > > Naama wrote: > >For me, it's almost a given that Snape will die. This has been > quoted many times: > > > >Q: There's an important kind of redemptive pattern to Snape > >A: He, um, there's so much I wish I could say to you, and I can't > because it would ruin. I > >promise you, whoever asked that question, can I just say to you > that I'm slightly stunned > >that you've said that and you'll find out why I'm so stunned if > you read Book 7. That's all > >I'm going to say. (found in www.quick-quote-quill.org, from a 1999 > interview). > > > >Not that she's explicitly saying, "he's going to sacrifice himself > to save Harry's life"... > >for me, though, it's as good as. > > > > Hannah: That's an interesting interrpretation. I really, really hope > you're right, because I'd rather have dead!good!Snape than living! > evil!Snape. As a Snape fan, I felt sick when I first read this > quote. I'd been fervently hoping up till then that Snape would turn > out to be a good guy in the end, and maybe even end up getting on ok > with Harry. I'd undergone mental contortions to excuse his > behaviour up till now. The problem with this intepretation is that JKR's answer appears to have been directed at a different question. In the full quote, the questioner asks whether Snape has ever loved anyone. JKR starts to answer, then the moderator of the interview interrupts with the words above about a redemptive pattern. However, when JKR replies, she refers again to the "whoever asked that question," indicating that she is speaking about the original question, not the words the moderator interjected. I think JKR's response about waiting until book 7 means we will find out just why Snape turned on Voldemort, and that it may well be very personal, i.e., someone he loved died because of Voldemort, directly or indirectly. Which works for me. I'm much more interested in learning about Snape's motives and past than seeing him sacrifice himself (or not) for Harry. Even more than his willingness to die for his cause, I think his motives for joining the cause are what will reveal Snape's true character (i.e., is he looking for redemption, revenge or just the easy way out). Julie [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Sun Nov 21 23:02:41 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Sun, 21 Nov 2004 23:02:41 -0000 Subject: Harry mastering his emotions in HPB (was: Plot in OotP) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118299 > Alla wrote previously: I am keeping my fingers crossed that Harry will save Snape's life. Egplant: If he did Snape would just sneer and say "Well Potter I see you're trying to play the hero again, be sure to alert the media." No I have a better cliffhanger to end the next book with: Snape and Harry are having the worst fight yet, it looks like they are about to come to blows when suddenly Voldemort appears and sends a lethal curse toward Harry. Without hesitation Snape jumps in front of Harry and received the curse instead, he saves Harry's life but dies instantly in the process. Harry now feels guilty for all the terrible things he called Snape just a few seconds ago, but mainly Harry is puzzled; why did Snape, a man full of hate, sacrifice himself for me. You'll have to wait for book 7 to find out. Alla: I think you misunderstood me. I want Harry to save Snape's life ONLY IF (IMO, of course) Snape will have to be punished at the end. If nothing else, I consider Snape to be the man of honor, I also think that he does consider himself to be in James' debt (whether you call it life debt or just a debt, it is canon). I think that if Snape does not acknowledge Harry for who he is in book 7 and continues degrade and humiliate him, Harry saving Snape's life will be the best punishment for Snape. What could be more fitting than for Snape to find himself to be in Potter's debt AGAIN? Of course if such thing happens and Harry survives at the end too, he better not send his kids to Hogwarts :o) If Snape will encounter an attitude change towards Harry, well then his heroic death I think will be one of the options he seeks, although of course I prefer to see him alive at the end. By the way, whatever happens, it is not going to be in book 6, you know that right? JKR said that we will find out more about Snape in book 7 From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Sun Nov 21 23:06:09 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Sun, 21 Nov 2004 23:06:09 -0000 Subject: The length of the Pensieve Scene In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118300 > Pippin: > > So, if Sirius sank to Snape's level, that makes it better > somehow? I don't think so. Maybe Sirius never used Dark Arts > (though using a werewolf as the tool of revenge is certainly dark > enough for me) but that just makes him like Crouch Sr, justifying > his ruthless measures by the ruthlessness of others. Not a > pretty picture. Alla: NO, Pippin, it does not make him better. It is just makes the picture more complete, because I just don't see Snape as innocent angel in his schoolyears. I just think that we will find out more about why James and Sirius hated him so, I just don't think that we know everything yet, that is all. Although if Sirius never used Dark Arts, I can certainly see him hating someone who did, even if such hatred is absolutely misplaced. From foxmoth at qnet.com Sun Nov 21 23:46:16 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Sun, 21 Nov 2004 23:46:16 -0000 Subject: Harry mastering his emotions in HPB (was: Plot in OotP) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118301 > Alla: > > I think you misunderstood me. I want Harry to save Snape's life ONLY IF (IMO, of course) Snape will have to be punished at the end. > > If nothing else, I consider Snape to be the man of honor, I also > think that he does consider himself to be in James' debt (whether you call it life debt or just a debt, it is canon). > Pippin: Possibly Harry will understand that it is difficult for Snape to act like a grownup because he isn't one. Peter did not age normally for a rat, so if Snape is only transfigured into human form (as I believe) he might be aging only as slowly as his original form. In that case he might still have a teenaged brain with poor impulse control. Judging by the famous wizard cards, vampires live about two hundred years or so. Pippin who doesn't think the book day chat rules out the possibility that Snape used to have links to vampires From foxmoth at qnet.com Mon Nov 22 00:20:36 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 00:20:36 -0000 Subject: Harry at the Dursleys Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118302 Mulling over some recent posts about how Harry could have turned out differently than Tom Riddle and why Dumbledore thought leaving Harry at the Dursleys was the best choice, I think these things may be related. Granted it would have been better for Harry to grow up in a safe, stable, loving home. But Dumbledore knew that if he found such a home in the wizarding world, the love and stability would last only as long as the safety did. In fact, since Lily gave up her life, and with it the love and the home she could have given to her son in order to protect him, you could say that Dumbledore honored her choice by taking Harry to the Dursleys. The Dursleys are dreadful, but they are nothing if not predictable, and though it may not seem much of a plus, I think it is why Harry made different choices than Riddle. Harry trusts that people are what they appear to be until proven otherwise. That makes him very different than the ultra-paranoid Voldemort, who suspects even his most devoted followers of plotting against him. I think we will find that Riddle's life before Hogwarts was much more unstable than Harry's was, so that he came to think that it was useless to trust anyone. Probably he had a succession of caregivers and never had a chance to bond with any of them, or if he did he then lost them. There are theories that say it is worse for a child to be treated well and badly by turns than to be treated badly all the time. I don't think that Dumbledore left Harry with the Dursleys for any kind of life lessons reason, but I do think that he may have felt that any pressure on the Dursleys would have a bad effect (especially on Vernon) and take away the one advantage, besides a whole skin, that Harry might glean from being with them. I think we sometimes exaggerate how miserable Harry is at Privet Drive. Voldemort has made him feel much worse than the Dursleys have. The Dursleys have *never* made Harry wish he were dead. Voldemort has. Pippin From jlnbtr at yahoo.com Sun Nov 21 22:32:49 2004 From: jlnbtr at yahoo.com (Juli) Date: Sun, 21 Nov 2004 14:32:49 -0800 (PST) Subject: Harry and Snape in HBP (Re: Harry mastering his emotions in HPB) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041121223249.13265.qmail@web53108.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 118303 Eggplant: > I have a better cliffhanger to end the next > book with: > > Snape and Harry are having the worst fight yet, it > looks like they are about to come to blows when > suddenly Voldemort appears and sends a lethal curse > toward Harry. Without hesitation Snape jumps in front > of Harry and received the curse instead, he saves > Harry's life but dies instantly in the process. Harry > now feels guilty for all the terrible things he called > Snape just a few seconds ago, but mainly Harry is > puzzled; why did Snape, a man full of hate, sacrifice > himself for me. You'll have to wait for book 7 to > find out. Juli: No, I think Harry and Snape have a much more complicated relation to end up like that. Snape has already saved Harry's life (Ps/SS, at least IMO), and he seems to care for Harry's life (He did go to the shrieking shack to save him), so all that's left is Harry saving Snape, but in a spectacular way, like Harry risking his own life to save Snape. Neither one needs to say "Thank you", they don't need words, they just look at each other and for the first time they smile (please don't look at this in a romantic way, it's just the two of them realizing they'll never be close or anything, just that they are on the same side and working together may bring something good. Juli From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Mon Nov 22 00:33:08 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 00:33:08 -0000 Subject: Harry at the Dursleys In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118304 Pippin: snip. > Granted it would have been better for Harry to grow up in a safe, > stable, loving home. But Dumbledore knew that if he found such > a home in the wizarding world, the love and stability would last > only as long as the safety did. Alla: Some will argue that some love and stability is better than nothing at all. Pippin: I don't think that Dumbledore left Harry with the Dursleys for any kind of life lessons reason, but I do think that he may have felt that any pressure on the Dursleys would have a bad effect (especially on Vernon) and take away the one advantage, besides a whole skin, that Harry might glean from being with them. Alla: I am glad that we agree on "life lessons" part, but I am unclear what is the other advantage besides being alive Harry has fromstayng with Dursleys? Pippin: > I think we sometimes exaggerate how miserable Harry is at > Privet Drive. Voldemort has made him feel much worse than the > Dursleys have. The Dursleys have *never* made Harry wish he > were dead. Voldemort has. Alla: I don't remember Hary "wishing" that he was dead at Dursleys, but I sure remember him being AFRAID that he will die there at least once. "Yet life at Privet Drive had reached an all-time low. Now that Dursleys knew they weren't going to wake up as fruit bats, he had lost his only weapon. Dobby might have saved Harry from horrible happenings at Hogwarts, but the way things were going, he'd probably starve to death anyway" - CoS, p.22, paperback. Sounds to me that he was being miserable enough there. From easimm at yahoo.com Sun Nov 21 22:59:18 2004 From: easimm at yahoo.com (curlyhornedsnorkack) Date: Sun, 21 Nov 2004 22:59:18 -0000 Subject: The length of the Pensieve Scene In-Reply-To: <20041121130426.53278.qmail@web53103.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118305 > Magda: > Snape didn't know that Lupin was a werewolf until he saw him during > the Prank, when he and James were in the tunnel. The book does not say what exactly Snape knew, or what he suspected. However, Snape suspected something before the near-werewolf-miss. In POA, Lupin says that Snape was interested in where Lupin went each month. Snape probably learned about werewolves in the 3rd year, in the DADA class. > Where did you get the idea that Snape already knew? If the Marauders were as indiscreet on a regular basis as they appear to be in Snape's memory, then Snape would probably be intelligent enough to start adding things up. "curlyhornedsnorkack" From dontask2much at yahoo.com Mon Nov 22 00:45:15 2004 From: dontask2much at yahoo.com (charme) Date: Sun, 21 Nov 2004 19:45:15 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Unfortunate!Peter References: <750698FD-3BB0-11D9-92A8-000A9577CB94@btconnect.com> Message-ID: <002b01c4d02c$88fc21a0$6701a8c0@MITRE.ORG> No: HPFGUIDX 118306 From: "Barry Arrowsmith" > Kneasy: > Way out of the box? > There's some out there that think I'm way out of my skull. > Glad you enjoy them and IMO it's differing opinions that makes life > entertaining. charme now: WRT to your "way out of my skull comment," join the club. :) I think it's great, and the way a lot of people on this board choose to look at things: the big picture. I'm glad to be a part of this insanity, if that's what other people believe it to be :) Thanks for the response, and please see my comments below yours.... > > Kneasy: > Peter as Lothario - is that your meaning? > If Peter ever went to the Evans/Dursley establishment (do we know if it > happened before Petunia married Vernon?) then I'd have expected him to > be one of a group. No confirmation of course, that'd make things too > easy. > > There's an interesting aspect to this little aside - why would anyone > want to talk to Petunia about Azkaban? Hardly a subject for polite > conversation over tea and cakes - unless, as I posted a few weeks ago > Harry's grandparents died as a result of Voldy/DE action. charme now: Yup, Peter as Lothario is exactly what I was getting at, although I'm not sure he would have been one of a group - and quite possibly it could have been the only time Peter ever visited? OR one wonders is Petunia hasn't been to Hogwarts at some point.... but that's another thread, isn't it? I thought Petunia said she heard "that awful boy" telling Lily about the Dementors and Azkaban - not that she had a direct conversation with Peter or whomever that "awful boy" was. >.charme: > I think it was James who told DD about the incident in the Shrieking > Shack after he'd saved Snape. > Kneasy: > I don't see it that way. > Snape enters the tunnel, sees a werewolf, gets dragged out by James - > what would he do? Scream his head off, I'd imagine, "Werewolf!" It'd > be round the school in 5 minutes flat. But it wasn't. Snape has no > reason to keep quiet and every reason to tell everybody what he's > seen. He doesn't. To me that implies there was somebody on the spot to > tell him to keep quiet, calm down, let's go to my office. Who else > but DD? charme now: Ever taken a professional rescue course? Can't rescue someone who is hysterical or combative, puts your own life at risk as the rescuer. Errrr.....he (Snape) might not be able to say anything to anyone if he was "stunned." :) I'll leave you to ponder that and just mention that I'm sure we'll find out in the next 2 books what really happened.... > > > > > Kneasy: > What DD admits to knowing and what he actually knows are two very > different things IMO. I just can't envision him locking up a > student/werewolf in an isolated shack every month and not checking up > on him, keeping an eye on him. And one very good way of doing so is to > have someone in the Marauders keeping him up to date with what they > were up to. Peter. > As for gravitating to the strongest - who's stronger than DD? No, I > suspect that this is Sirius sour grapes; he's second fiddle to James. > He accepts it but it doesn't mean he likes it, especially when a > nonentity like Peter rubs it in by fawning on James and ignoring > Sirius. charme now: I agree with you about DD keeping tabs on his little Whomping Willow secret - but I think that watch he has does that quite nicely for him now, so why wouldn't we consider he'd have a magical way to do it then? :) I don't think that DD would *need* Peter to do any Marauder spying for him if you believe at the time the Marauders were in school DD was considered the "strongest." Sirius, by JKR's quotes, loved James and MM says they were "like brothers" in PoA. They treated Peter like a little tag-a-long brother, and while we only saw one interaction betwix all of them in OoP; there are probably others where Sirius got just as much idol worship as James. > Kneasy: >>Scabbers vanishes into the sewers. Right. Then what? Where does he > > > go? Who does he see? Want a suggestion? > OK - Dumbledore. > > > > > > charme: > How about another suggestion or two? Lucius Malfoy or even Fudge, as > Fudge was the first person on the scene after Peter's suppposed demise. > I could also think of others Peter could have gone to, so DD isn't the > only one. > > > > Kneasy: > At the time Fudge wasn't important in the Ministry. Unless he's a > secret DE he'd have no reason to hide Peter. If he was a DE then the > same arguments apply as to Malfoy: if Peter had gone to either then > it's unlikely that the DEs later caught after the Longbottoms were > tortured would believe Peter to be dead - they'd know he wasn't. > Malfoy has no reason to keep it from them and if he thought that Peter > had betrayed Voldy then Peter would have become a stain on the carpet > in short order. charme now: I'm not so sure someone didn't help him, I just don't believe it was DD. As far as Malfoy is concerned, *Malfoy* is an opportunist and I get the distinct feeling from his responses to LV in GoF graveyard scene, he's not necessarily "challenged" by LV as some of the other DEs are. Note as well that Avery got a Crucio from LV in that scene - Malfoy didn't. I sense some tension there, and am not sure quite what it represents. However, to your point about Fudge and the question of his DE'ness , this goes back to the dicussion of it's not as clear cut as being or not being a DE, IMO. It's that gray area of "not really involved" or "on the outside of it all looking in." Think about it - a party comes to you for help professing that someone tried to kill you, and you know all sides of the situation: the DE's and what they believe, and then what everyone else believes. You know it's best if you're not involved, especially since you want to be the MoM. So if you're Fudge, you want this person to "disappear" since it's in your best interests, and the interests of everybody (remember, Fudge, doesn't like complications) to avoid any future "incidents." It's not too far fetched - they call it "witness protection" here in the US. :) From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Mon Nov 22 01:33:47 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 01:33:47 -0000 Subject: Plot in OotP (the revised version) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118307 Kim wrote: > > Maybe over the coming years, after she finishes the series, she'll > > go back to the books, do some editing, and publish "new and > > improved" versions, and then we'll all be happy... > > Geoff: > Revision is not unknown among writers. Tolkien immediately springs to mind because, after all, he rewrote sections of the "Hobbit" (which > was originally conceived as a "stand alone" book) after he started > work on LOTR because they became part of the same canon. Carol adds: And just as JKR blamed Marcus Flint for his extra year at Hogwarts, JRRT blamed the "usually honest" Bilbo for the account of finding the One Ring that appeared in "The Hobbit" as originally published, which Tolkien himself changed in LOTR to "what really happened." Carol, quoting from memory From foxmoth at qnet.com Mon Nov 22 01:40:29 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 01:40:29 -0000 Subject: Harry at the Dursleys In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118308 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "dumbledore11214" > Pippin: > > snip. > > > Granted it would have been better for Harry to grow up in a safe, stable, loving home. But Dumbledore knew that if he found such a home in the wizarding world, the love and stability would last only as long as the safety did. > > Alla: > > Some will argue that some love and stability is better than nothing at all.< Pippin: "Better to have loved and lost than never to have loved at all" is a very mature way to look at things, I agree. But we are talking about a young child, and I 'm not sure children look at things that way. At least Harry was only orphaned once. Who knows how many caregivers he would have lost to violent death or abandonment, one after another, if he'd stayed in the wizarding world? Not the sort of upbringing I would choose for a child I feared might have paranoid tendencies acquired from Voldemort. > Pippin: > I don't think that Dumbledore left Harry with the Dursleys for any kind of life lessons reason, but I do think that he may have felt that any pressure on the Dursleys would have a bad effect (especially on Vernon) and take away the one advantage, besides a whole skin, that Harry might glean from being with them. < > Alla: > > I am glad that we agree on "life lessons" part, but I am unclear > what is the other advantage besides being alive Harry has from staying with Dursleys?< Pippin: The Dursleys do not act like the kind of abusive or neglectful parents who are cruel and affectionate by turns, and expect their mistreated children to love them one day and can't be bothered with them the next. I think that Tom had a lot of treatment like that, and it made him paranoid. The Dursleys always treat Harry, and each other, the same way, so Harry learns to think that people are predictable. He didn't have anyone to love or trust at the Dursleys, but at least his ability to love and trust wasn't destroyed. Tom's was. > Pippin: > > I think we sometimes exaggerate how miserable Harry is at Privet Drive. Voldemort has made him feel much worse than the Dursleys have. The Dursleys have *never* made Harry wish he were dead. Voldemort has. > > > Alla: > > I don't remember Hary "wishing" that he was dead at Dursleys, but I sure remember him being AFRAID that he will die there at least once.< > > > "Yet life at Privet Drive had reached an all-time low. Now that > Dursleys knew they weren't going to wake up as fruit bats, he had lost his only weapon. Dobby might have saved Harry from horrible happenings at Hogwarts, but the way things were going, he'd probably starve to death anyway" - CoS, p.22, paperback. > > Sounds to me that he was being miserable enough there.< Pippin: Miserable, yes, afraid he might die, yes, but not so unhappy that he wished he would. The canon you have just quoted says that it was *never* worse than that. And what caused it? Interference from the magical world, in the form of Dobby. Pippin From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Mon Nov 22 01:43:26 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 01:43:26 -0000 Subject: Plot in OotP (a small correction) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118309 Carol earlier: > > > > ... (I hope that Alice the dog-faced woman was not just a Mark > > Evans, dropped in as a bit of background.) > > > bboyminn responded: > > Alice - The Dog-Faced Woman??? Where was that? How could I have missed > it? Really, is that in the book? Carol corrects herself: I meant Agnes, not Alice. She's in the same ward in St. Mungo's as Alice Longbottom, which is why I mistyped the name. Her son was supposed to visit her on Christmas night, but Harry didn't witness the visit. Posters on this list have speculated that the son is Snape. Carol, apologizing for not going downthread to see if this has already been answered From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Mon Nov 22 01:54:20 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 01:54:20 -0000 Subject: Harry at the Dursleys In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118310 > Pippin: The Dursleys do not act like the kind of abusive or neglectful parents who are cruel and affectionate by turns, and expect their mistreated children to love them one day and can't be bothered with them the next. I think that Tom had a lot of treatment like that, and it made him paranoid. The Dursleys always treat Harry, and each other, the same way, so Harry learns to think that people are predictable. He didn't have anyone to love or trust at the Dursleys, but at least his ability to love and trust wasn't destroyed. Tom's was. Alla: Oh, I got it. You are arguing that being mistreated all the time is better than being mistreated and being treated well in turns, correct? I strongly disagree, but at least I understand. No, we definitely don't see "circle of violence" in Dursleys' behaviour, but why are they better because of that? Yes, Harry may have learned stability - in a negative way. Stability, which should never be learned, IMO. I most certainly don't see how such stability did not destroy Harry's ability to love and trust. Alla previously "Yet life at Privet Drive had reached an all-time low. Now that Dursleys knew they weren't going to wake up as fruit bats, he had lost his only weapon. Dobby might have saved Harry from horrible happenings at Hogwarts, but the way things were going, he'd probably starve to death anyway" - CoS, p.22, paperback. Sounds to me that he was being miserable enough there.< > Pippin: > > Miserable, yes, afraid he might die, yes, but not so unhappy that > he wished he would. The canon you have just quoted says that it > was *never* worse than that. And what caused it? Interference > from the magical world, in the form of Dobby. Alla: I am sorry? Child who is afraid that he will die of hunger is not miserable enough? I take exception to that, Pippin. And since that incident was horrible IMO, "never worse than that" really does not give much justification, IMO. From jlnbtr at yahoo.com Mon Nov 22 02:28:25 2004 From: jlnbtr at yahoo.com (Juli) Date: Sun, 21 Nov 2004 18:28:25 -0800 (PST) Subject: Harry at the Dursleys In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041122022825.23086.qmail@web53101.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 118311 Alla: > "Dobby might have saved Harry from horrible happenings at Hogwarts, but the way things were going, he'd probably starve to death anyway" - CoS, p.22, paperback. > Sounds to me that he was being miserable enough there.< Pippin: > > Miserable, yes, afraid he might die, yes, but not so unhappy that he wished he would. And what caused it? Interference from the magical world, in the form of Dobby. Alla: > I am sorry? Child who is afraid that he will die of hunger is not miserable enough? Juli: I don't think the Dursleys would let Harry die of hunger, that would create to much trouble for them (Remember at the beginnig of OoP right after the dementors attack and Vernon wanted to kick Harry out, then the howler arrived and Petunia said he had to stay, why? asked Vernon, Because the neighbors may notice and start asking questions), so I guess if Harry died all of a sudden on them, they might get in trouble, or the neighbors must notice and there's no way the Dursleys would like to see something getting on their very perfect and normal life. So even if it is just to keep apperances, they will keep Harry alive. Or maybe Petunia fears what Dumbledore may do to her. "Remember my last..." seems like a threat to me not just a reminder. Juli From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Mon Nov 22 03:07:08 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 03:07:08 -0000 Subject: Plot in OotP (wand confusion) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118312 Carol earlier: > > > > It's like the carelessness regarding wands in the graveyard scene of GoF: How can Harry be holding his wand *and* the portkey in one hand and dragging Cedric's body with the other? > > bboyminn replied: > > Others have responded, but what we really have here is a matter of > reader perspective, reader perspective that has been inflamed by > reader emotions. Not saying you are over emotional, just that you are filling in the spaces between lines in way that others surely don't see. > > Take the wand/portkey example; hold a ruler in your hand and pick up a coffee cup by the handle; it's really not that hard. Others mentioned that Harry isn't dragging Cedric anywhere, he's just holding his wrist. In addition, he doesn't really have to hold the entire portkey (Tri-Wiz Cup), he just has to touch the handle. Just like you can grasp a coffee cup handle while holding a ruler, all Harry has to do is get a finger or two around the handle and he's home free. Once the cup/portkey is touched and activated, you are stuck to it as it pulls you onward. > Carol responds: I hope I don't sound rude, but readers' emotions have nothing to do with it. It's an awkward, almost impossible moment: "'Accio!' Harry yelled, pointing his wand at the Triwizard Cup. It flew into the air and soared toward him. Harry caught it by the handle--He heard Voldemort's scream of fury at the same moment that he felt the jerk behind his navel..." Harry has to *catch* the presumably heavy TWT cup with a hand that's already holding the wand that a second before was pointing at the cup. His other hand is grasping Cedric's arm. The natural reaction would be to drop the wand and catch the cup handle, but he somehow manages to hold onto the wand, as we know because he has it with him when he returns, and still catch the flying cup, possibly with his thumb and forefinger as the other three fingers clutch the wand. Awkward, to say the least. It's a badly choreographed moment, like Wormtail holding Baby Voldie yet still (unless you're a conspiracy theorist) managing to AK Cedric. (Later, as someone else pointed out, he has to fumble with the wand to tie Harry up. He doesn't have his own wand, as we know from the Shrieking Shack scene. He uses LV's wand for the AK and presumably the other spell, but as Kneasy pointed out, that spell doesn't show up in the Priori Incantatem scene--too minor? Not evil? Harry wasn't paying that much attention? JKR forgot or deliberately ignored it?) The whole business of the wands is very badly handled in that chapter. I don't think JKR was paying attention to minor details. She was concerned with the main action and with sustaining an atmosphere of tenseness and suspense. Carol, whose only reaction to this scene is wholly analytical though she did cry for Cedric From sherriola at earthlink.net Mon Nov 22 03:17:01 2004 From: sherriola at earthlink.net (Sherry Gomes) Date: Sun, 21 Nov 2004 20:17:01 -0700 Subject: [HPforGrownups] June 2005 Release for HBP? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <003501c4d041$bcb5cfe0$0400a8c0@pensive> No: HPFGUIDX 118313 Mugglenet.com quotes "someone in a position to know" as saying Scholastic plans to releae HBP in June 2005 with possible target dates June 11 and June 18. See mugglenet for more details. Cheers, Inkling Sherry now Can you post a link to that? i've been on muggle net but can't find it. Thanks. Sherry From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Mon Nov 22 03:50:43 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 03:50:43 -0000 Subject: The Pensieve (again) (Was: Unfortunate!Peter) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118314 Azriona wrote: > > > I can't trust that Pensieve. We forget that we are seeing Peter > through *Snape's* eyes, and I think most would agree that as far as > the Marauders are concerned, Snape is hardly an impartial judge. We > see James and Co. not as the boys they were, but as the boys they > were *to Snape*. Carol responds: A few quick points: 1) If the Pensieve distorted memories subjectively in favor of the person whose memories they are, Snape would have had no reason to hide this memory from Harry. Clearly, he found it humiliating, in no way favorable to himself even though to us (and to Harry), he appears to be an innocent victim. 2) The primary purpose of a Pensieve is apparently not to conceal them from others but to *sift* them ("sieve" = "sifter") for objective study outside the subjective context of one's own mind, as Dumbledore does. 3) As I've already noted, Harry does not see through Severus's eyes in this memory. He walks around inside the memory, overhearing conversations and seeing things (such as Lily's initials on James's DADA exam) that Seversu could not possibly have seen. (He was intent on his own exam, his nose almost touching the parchment. Moreover, James and his friends were behind Severus, IIRC.) I really think that the whole point of the Pensieve scene was to reveal MWPP to Harry and to the reader as they really were. What is the point of the scene otherwise? Any unreliability in this scene would come, IMO, from Harry's interpretation of it via the limited omniscient narrator and not from the memory itself. We do not know Severus's thoughts or what he wrote on his paper or what he saw or heard. We do know what was going on around him from an outsider's perspective, more clearly than he, wrapped in his subjective thoughts of the exam and the attack by James and Sirius, could possibly have perceived them at the time or in later recollections. Note that Dumbledore's memories are similarly treated in GoF. No one suggests that *they* are anything other than an objective record of what really happened that DD has chosen to study to interpret the strange happenings at Hogwarts regarding the TWT, Mr. Crouch, and the supposed Alastor Moody. Carol, who agrees that DD has more spies than Severus Snape but does not think that Peter Pettigrew is one of them From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Mon Nov 22 04:15:51 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 04:15:51 -0000 Subject: Plot in OotP In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118315 > Geoff wrote (about the DE that "purple-slashed" Hermione): > >He can be identified quite clearly from canon as Antonin Dolohov...< > Now Kim: > And thanks, Geoff, for ID-ing Dolohov as the purple-slasher. > > Baby-Head and the Purple-Slasher -- great comic book (or WWF) names! Carol adds: I knew that the curse caster was Dolohov. what I want to know, and examining the MoM scene won't answer the question, is what that curse was that he cast. Dolohov is clearly evil (a known murderer) and apparently very powerful, given the harm to Hermione caused by a curse that he could only whisper. But what was the curse? Not an Unforgiveable or any curse we've seen so far (the only purple or violet-flamed curse or hex I can recall is Hagrid's attempt to turn Dudley into a pig in SS/PS, clearly not the same spell). Carol, who wonders how Crabbe Jr. will react to the condition of his father if Crabbe Sr. is indeed the baby-headed DE and is still in St. Mungo's rather than Azkaban with Lucius Malfoy From bob.oliver at cox.net Mon Nov 22 04:24:24 2004 From: bob.oliver at cox.net (lupinlore) Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 04:24:24 -0000 Subject: Harry at the Dursleys In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118316 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "pippin_999" wrote: > In fact, since Lily gave up her life, > and with it the love and the home she could have given to her > son in order to protect him, you could say that Dumbledore > honored her choice by taking Harry to the Dursleys. Pardon me? I'm afraid I don't see this reasoning at all. > I don't think that Dumbledore left Harry with the Dursleys for any > kind of life lessons reason, but I do think that he may have felt > that any pressure on the Dursleys would have a bad effect > (especially on Vernon) and take away the one advantage, > besides a whole skin, that Harry might glean from being with > them. Well, the fact is that we are all speculating pretty wildly here. Pippin's interpretation may be right, but there are others that can be argued just as plausibly. The problem is we just don't have enough information. I rather think what we are dealing with, in part, is the fact that JKR knows her story and characters in ways we don't. It is very hard for an author to put themselves in the position of a reader who knows only what the text says. I suspect she believes she has explained all of these issues better than she in fact has. To her, the text probably leads obviously to one set of conclusions. Unfortunately, to people without her "inside knowledge," the text seems very ambiguous and even contradictory on a lot of these issues. Let's just hope this is part of what gets cleared up in the "backstory" JKR has promised. Lupinlore From foxmoth at qnet.com Mon Nov 22 05:17:50 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 05:17:50 -0000 Subject: Plot in OotP (wand confusion) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118317 > Carol responds:" > > Harry has to *catch* the presumably heavy TWT cup with a hand that's already holding the wand that a second before was pointing at the cup.< Ah, I see the problem. You're imagining that he has to aim the wand at the cup, guide the cup to him with the wand, then catch it as it hurtles past at top speed. But it doesn't work like that. In GoF, Harry summons his broom, then simply waits for it to arrive, which it eventually does "And then he heard it, speeding through the air behind him; he turned and saw his Firebolt hurtling towards him around the edge of the woods, soaring into the enclosure , and stopping dead in mid-air beside him, waiting for him to mount."--GoF 20 I see no reason the cup wouldn't behave in the same way. As soon as Harry shouted Accio, it came right to his hand and stopped dead of its own accord. I have a souvenir wand (non-functional, alas) made of a dowel and a clothes peg, which I can hold easily with my ring and little fingers against my palm, leaving two fingers and thumb free to grasp. Carol: > It's a badly choreographed moment, like Wormtail holding Baby Voldie yet still (unless you're a conspiracy theorist) managing to AK Cedric.< What is this compulsion to believe that JKR doesn't know what she's doing? Clearly it was impossible for Peter to AK Cedric. Why not admit that Peter didn't do it? As Sherlock Holmes remarked, when the impossible is eliminated, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth. I know two Wormtails sounds unlikely, but just imagine that GoF had come out as a serial. Would you have been prepared to believe after The Egg and The Eye chapter that 'Bartemius Crouch' wasn't the Ministry official we had met, but another character we hadn't even heard of so far? And yet, if someone had asked, "Was it really Barty Crouch that Harry saw burgling Snape's office?" what would JKR have answered except, "Correct." Pippin who thinks that JKR is generally careful about the details that matter, and purposefully foggy about the ones that don't. From foxmoth at qnet.com Mon Nov 22 05:35:44 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 05:35:44 -0000 Subject: Harry at the Dursleys In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118318 Pippin: > In fact, since Lily gave up her life, and with it the love and the home she could have given to her son in order to protect him, you could say that Dumbledore honored her choice by taking Harry to the Dursleys.<< Lupinlore > Pardon me? I'm afraid I don't see this reasoning at all. Pippin: James instructed Lily to "Take Harry and go! It's him! Go! Run! I'll hold him off." Clearly he had some means of escape in mind. But Harry was in his cot when Lily died (per the website), so she wasn't fleeing the house with him when she died. Knowing that Voldemort would never stop hunting Harry, she chose to give up her life, and the love and the home she could have made for him, in order to give him the blood protection. Since this is ancient magic, it is something she could have known about. Dumbledore understood what she had done, and honored her sacrifice by taking Harry to live with the Dursleys. Of course you could read it otherwise. But I think it is JKR's purpose at this point in the story to allow us multiple interpretations, and force us to ask, What is goodness? What sort of sacrifice could be so powerful? rather than spoon feeding us the answers. Pippin From annemehr at yahoo.com Mon Nov 22 05:43:04 2004 From: annemehr at yahoo.com (annemehr) Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 05:43:04 -0000 Subject: Plot in OotP In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118319 > Carol, who wonders how Crabbe Jr. will react to the condition of his > father if Crabbe Sr. is indeed the baby-headed DE and is still in St. > Mungo's rather than Azkaban with Lucius Malfoy Well, they could have just called in Croaker or someone to stick his head back into the bell jar and age him up again before hauling him off to the pokey... Annemehr From BamaJenny12 at yahoo.com Mon Nov 22 05:23:13 2004 From: BamaJenny12 at yahoo.com (Jenny H) Date: Sun, 21 Nov 2004 23:23:13 -0600 Subject: Two Wormtails (was Re: Plot in OotP (wand confusion)) References: Message-ID: <00f001c4d053$655d1ac0$0201a8c0@ROLLTIDE> No: HPFGUIDX 118320 Carol: >> It's a badly choreographed moment, like Wormtail holding Baby Voldie yet still (unless you're a conspiracy theorist) managing to AK Cedric. << Pippin: > What is this compulsion to believe that JKR doesn't know what she's doing? Clearly it was impossible for Peter to AK Cedric. Why not admit that Peter didn't do it? I know two Wormtails sounds unlikely, Jenny here: Why two Wormtails? Ask any mother how much can be done with one hand while holding a baby in the other. 8-)) From azriona at juno.com Mon Nov 22 07:09:48 2004 From: azriona at juno.com (Sharon) Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 07:09:48 -0000 Subject: The Pensieve (again) (Was: Unfortunate!Peter) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118321 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" wrote: > Carol responds: > A few quick points: 1) If the Pensieve distorted memories > subjectively in favor of the person whose memories they are, Snape > would have had no reason to hide this memory from Harry. Clearly, > he found it humiliating, in no way favorable to himself even though > to us (and to Harry), he appears to be an innocent victim. But Snape does have a reason to hide this memory from Harry, regardless of whether or not it's been distorted - it was humiliating to him, and he didn't want Harry to find it. Period. It wasn't because he didn't want Harry to see how horrible James & Sirius were as kids; it was because Snape didn't want Harry to see the extend of the humiliation towards himself. > Carol: > 2) The primary purpose of a Pensieve is apparently not to conceal > them from others but to *sift* them ("sieve" = "sifter") for > objective study outside the subjective context of one's own mind, > as Dumbledore does. True. But Snape is using Dumbledore's Pensieve as a way to conceal them from Harry. He doesn't put anything into the Pensieve until just before he and Harry begin their duel, and the moment the session is over, Harry sees Snape take the memories back out again. There is no time for Snape to pause and reflect over them - in fact, it doesn't seem that Snape even wants to take advantage of the opportunity to do so. Carol: > 3) As I've already noted, Harry does not see through Severus's eyes > in this memory. He walks around inside the memory, overhearing > conversations and seeing things (such as Lily's initials on James's > DADA exam) that Severus could not possibly have seen. (He was intent > on his own exam, his nose almost touching the parchment. Moreover, > James and his friends were behind Severus, IIRC.) Also true. And I agree that no one would see those memories through the eyes of the one who they belong to - but I still stand that by remaining so long in the original person's memory, they can't help but be influenced by them. No, Snape didn't see what James wrote on his exam. But had 15 year old Snape been asked, don't you think he might have said, "Oh, Potter's probably still mooning over that Mudblood Evans." Snape himself may have "filled in the holes" in his memory, so to speak. Even the conversation he apparently was not listening to (such as the one the boys had about werewolves on the exam) was background noise to 15 year old Snape, and the Pensieve might have simply enlarged it for his later study (and Harry's benefit) at a later time. And as it's *still Snape's memory*, there may be missing pieces we aren't aware of happening. Therefore I'm not willing to take the Pensieve scene as an accurate rendition of what happened that day. Carol: > I really think that the whole point of the Pensieve scene was to > reveal MWPP to Harry and to the reader as they really were. What is > the point of the scene otherwise? Agreed, to an extent. The point of the scene is definitely to let Harry in on the fact that his dad wasn't perfect. Any supposition on our parts, beyond that, is merely us perhaps being a bit too serious about the matter. Azriona, who still thinks Peter was a spy for DD, but knows there's not a lot of canon to back it up From azriona at juno.com Mon Nov 22 07:55:05 2004 From: azriona at juno.com (Sharon) Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 07:55:05 -0000 Subject: Peter & Petunia (was Re: Unfortunate!Peter) In-Reply-To: <002b01c4d02c$88fc21a0$6701a8c0@MITRE.ORG> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118322 > > Kneasy: > > Peter as Lothario - is that your meaning? > > If Peter ever went to the Evans/Dursley establishment (do we > > know if it happened before Petunia married Vernon?) then I'd > > have expected him to be one of a group. > > > > There's an interesting aspect to this little aside - why would > > anyone want to talk to Petunia about Azkaban? Hardly a subject > > for polite conversation over tea and cakes - unless, as I > > posted a few weeks ago Harry's grandparents died as a result of > > Voldy/DE action. > > charme now: > Yup, Peter as Lothario is exactly what I was getting at, although > I'm not sure he would have been one of a group - and quite possibly > it could have been the only time Peter ever visited? OR one wonders > if Petunia hasn't been to Hogwarts at some point... I thought Petunia > said she heard "that awful boy" telling Lily about the Dementors and > Azkaban - not that she had a direct conversation with Peter or > whomever that "awful boy" was. My whole theory with Peter and Petunia is that they knew each other long before Hogwarts. But this is all theory, and while it can be sort of supported with canon, it isn't really based in it. It's based in the idea (which I had long before OoP was released) that Petunia knows more about the wizarding world than she lets on. Even before OoP was released, I had the idea that Petunia knew exactly not only what had happened to her sister Lily, but that the same might have occured to Harry - and that had she not taken Harry in, he might have still ended up dead. There was, after all, a letter from Dumbledore left for her when Harry was dropped on her doorstep. And we still don't know what was in that letter, although I suspect it was a rendition of what had happened to her sister two nights before. But in order for Petunia to fully understand the danger that Harry was in, she must have had some sort of previous knowledge of the wizarding world and its inner politics. She could not have always been on the edge, forever resentful and forever bitter. (Because she is very resentful of Lily, and she is very bitter as well.) There must have been a time when Petunia was willing to listen and be somewhat involved in the wizarding world - and perhaps still close enough to Lily to want to be a part of that life. And one of the best ways that I can see for this to have been the case is that in some small way, even before Lily received her letter, the girls were *already* involved in the wizarding world to some extent - if not by their own family lines (since Lily is Muggle-born and Petunia is not a Squib), then by some other means. They must have had some contact with wizards before Hogwarts, either as personal or family friends. It could not have been the Potters, because according to canon, Lily didn't meet James until Hogwarts. It could not have been the Blacks, because no way would the Blacks have interacted with Muggles. It could not have been the Lupins, because Remus himself says that he did not have much contact with other children before he went to Hogwarts (and in fact, he doesn't really mention Lily at all, except for in the movie, which doesn't count by much in my book). Who does that leave? Peter. Had Petunia and Peter known each other since before Lily ever left for school, she would have had a longstanding friendship with someone already in the wizarding world, and this could explain not only how she is aware of the various politics and dangers present, but also why she retained that information about Azkaban for so long. Because why on earth would Petunia remember something as random as who guards the wizard prison if there wasn't a good reason to remember it? (And let's remember that Petunia even remembers the correct pronounciation of both "Dementors" and "Azkaban", which Vernon can't seem to keep straight for more than two seconds. She's obviously had this on her mind *a lot*.) And yes, she's got a good reason already, because Sirius Black is in Azkaban, and he killed her sister Lily. But had he killed her friend Peter as well...that's even more of a blow. But... I don't think Petunia remembers this information because of Sirius Black. At the beginning of PoA, when Sirius Black is even touted in the Muggle press as an escaped convict, Petunia shows little to no reaction to his name. In fact, she doesn't appear to react at all until Vernon points out that the man could be walking down their street at that exact moment. Had Petunia been thinking about Azkaban in conjunction with Sirius Black - she would have reacted to his name immediately. Maybe she was spacing, and it didn't click right away. But I sort of doubt it. That morning in PoA was a calm one, where she was only concerned about the bacon. The evening in OoP where she just popped right out with that information about Azkaban was far more stressful. Petunia's connection to the WW is far more intense than that of a sister or an aunt. She wasn't magical herself (JKR said as much in a recent chat) but...there's something there. Even JKR admits it. Did Petunia know Peter well before the events at GH? I think there's a good possibility. It would make *sense*. For, if Lily and Peter had been friends from childhood, it would give them a connection as well as Peter and James. It would give them more of a reason to trust Peter with the position of Secret Keeper - Lily could never believe that a childhood friend would be the spy. It would make sense then for Peter to sit between them in the OoP picture, if he was as close to Lily as he was to James. And it would have paved the way for James and Lily to reconcile with each other after their very obvious false starts in the Pensieve Scene. Allowing Peter and Petunia to know each other as friends and not simply acquaintences allows for so many more loose ends to be tied up, and so many fewer questions brought up that it's almost too easy. And I'll fully admit some amount of bias toward the connection - but I'd be interested to see someone try to disprove it. -az From willsonkmom at msn.com Mon Nov 22 12:21:00 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 12:21:00 -0000 Subject: Harry and Snape in HBP (Re: Harry mastering his emotions in HPB) In-Reply-To: <20041121223249.13265.qmail@web53108.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118323 > Juli: > No, I think Harry and Snape have a much more > complicated relation to end up like that. snip > it's just the two of them realizing they'll never be > close or anything, just that they are on the same side > and working together may bring something good. > Potioncat, This reminds me of Professor McGonagall, who doesn't think very much of divination or of Professor Trelawney, but when Trelawney is attacked by Umbridge, McGonagall is there to comfort her. From inkling108 at yahoo.com Mon Nov 22 12:43:28 2004 From: inkling108 at yahoo.com (inkling108) Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 12:43:28 -0000 Subject: June 2005 Release for HBP? In-Reply-To: <003501c4d041$bcb5cfe0$0400a8c0@pensive> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118324 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Sherry Gomes" wrote: > Mugglenet.com quotes "someone in a position to know" as saying > Scholastic plans to releae HBP in June 2005 with possible target > dates June 11 and June 18. See mugglenet for more details. > > Cheers, > > Inkling > > Sherry now > > Can you post a link to that? i've been on muggle net but can't find it. > Thanks. > > Sherry Inkling again: That may be because it was posted on Friday and has moved down the scroll of news items on the home page and gotten a bit buried amongst the other items. My husband and technical adviser tells me I can't link to that particular bit of text, but if you go back to www.mugglenet.com and scroll down to Friday's new items, you will find it. I was excited to read it on mugglenet because they are usually pretty responsible and reliable about these rumors. If they say it's someone who should know, I take it seriously! The linked editorial is also encouraging. Inkling From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Mon Nov 22 12:58:30 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 12:58:30 -0000 Subject: The resolution of Snape (was Re: Harry mastering his emotions in In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118325 SSSusan: >> So, unless something extraordinary is coming upon us, I don't imagine Snape will be willing to do much changing. THUS [i.e., consequentially, as a direct result of this], I do think Harry will have to figure out what to do about that. If he will be required to interact much with Snape in the next two years, then I think he'll choose the "adult," "mature," "noble," "responsible," even [gasp] "martyr-esque" [choose your fav or least fav term] tack of saying, either literally or figuratively to Snape, "Yeah, whatever. You go off on that, but I've got work to do." Naama: > For me, it's almost a given that Snape will die. This has been > quoted many times: > > Q: There's an important kind of redemptive pattern to Snape > A: He, um, there's so much I wish I could say to you, and I can't > because it would ruin. I promise you, whoever asked that question, > can I just say to you that I'm slightly stunned that you've said > that and you'll find out why I'm so stunned if you read Book 7. > That's all I'm going to say. (found in www.quick-quote-quill.org, > from a 1999 interview). > > Not that she's explicitly saying, "he's going to sacrifice himself > to save Harry's life"... for me, though, it's as good as. > > I agree with Lupinlore that Harry learning to grin and bear it with > Snape would be insipid [it, not you, SSSusan!]. I don't exactly > know why - it sounds so healthy and well-adjusted. > A bit too much, maybe? And also, and please forgive me if I'm being > offensive here - a bit too American? At least the kind of American > you see on "wholesome" family shows (of the kind they *do not* make > on HBO, thank God). It just feels wrong to have that kind of > resolution in the British, very English even, setting of HP. SSSusan: Hey, Naama. No offense taken to the comment about American sitcoms. You want a place to apply the word "insipid"? There you go!! :-) As I've mentioned before, I've nothing invested in Snape's survival or his death--I could go either way as long as JKR makes his role important. My only problem with using this particular quote as backup for the view that Snape's gonna bite it is what Juli posted later in the thread: apparently those who've *heard* this interview say it leaves a different impression, that JKR was actually responding to a questioner just prior to the interviewer's inserting that "important kind of redemptive pattern" remark. As for Harry's turning the other cheek being just too healthy & well- adjusted...hasn't Harry seemed overall a bit this already? Parents murdered, left with his abusive relatives, yet somehow knows how to choose the good & noble path? You know? So...what if he turned the other cheek but gritted his teeth while doing it and still vented to his friends? Would that make it more palatable? :-) Siriusly Snapey Susan, who thinks Harry *is* remarkably healthy & noble. From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Mon Nov 22 13:40:01 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 13:40:01 -0000 Subject: Long-haired characters (was: Muggleborns choosing WW) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118326 > > Siriusly Snapey Susan, who, after viewing photos of the PoA > > launch party in London, wants to take some scissors to some of > > these young men's hair! Sandy: > Oh, but long hair is SO canon. Think about it, everyone we really > like to write about here has long hair -- Snape's is described as > shoulder length, and Sirius and Lupin are both described as having > long hair. I don't think JKR actually calls James'"long" but since > he likes it to look windblown, it's not a crewcut for sure. And DD > and Bill Weasley are on the superlong bandwagon. (I think JKR is > just giving a nod to her/my generation with the long hair on cool > guys thing). SSSusan: Hee hee. A couple of you have commented onlist about my P.S., and since you managed to do so by bringing up canon, Sandy, I feel I can respond openly. :-) Yes, absolutely, there is long hair in canon. Bill, Snape & Sirius definitely have long hair in canon. (Is Lupin described as having long hair? I can't recall for sure.) However, "Bill," "Snape" & "Sirius" weren't at the PoA DVD launch party and "Lupin's" hair was cut short; my reaction was to the younger characters. For the record, I really *like* long hair on some men--in fact, I think "Fred" & "George" [see how I'm making this canon-based? ] looked really good. But "Ron's" hair when he's away from filming just hangs in his eyes, "Harry's" and "Neville's" looked just unkempt to me, and, "Percy's" was just...well, too much! (Though now that I keep looking...maybe it's the scruffy facial hair and not the massive curls?) Hmmm. Can we imagine prim, prissy Percy w/ long curly auburn locks in canon? Anybody have thoughts? Really, really, all--I'm not a total old fuddy-duddy! I like long hair but I like to see eyes, too, and I like to see a hairstyle that suits the wearer. Siriusly Snapey Susan, hoping not to have aroused the wrath of the list elves w/ this tangentially-canon-related post. From spherissa at gmail.com Mon Nov 22 12:29:15 2004 From: spherissa at gmail.com (Amanda Coleman) Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 22:59:15 +1030 Subject: Is Petunia older or younger than Lily? In-Reply-To: References: <002b01c4d02c$88fc21a0$6701a8c0@MITRE.ORG> Message-ID: <8c20328104112204292615bef4@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 118327 Is Petunia older or younger than Lily? If younger I can picture Lily and her as good friends and close sisters and Lily confiding in Petunia about what Hogwarts was like, and her new friends and telling her about magic even if, with the no magic in the holidays ban, Petunia might not have seen it. Imagine her disappointment if they had been planning what they would do when Petunia got her letter, and then it never came. Disappointed dreams do turn to bitter resentment. Or she might have been older and everyone's favourite, and then Lily marries James, who is from an old family, has money, and even in term of the muggle world that has a certain cachet. Vernon is a salesman, and doesn't have any of the style or grace of the impression of James. This is supported by their belittling of James and Lily's place in the world - It makes Petunia feel herself more; less of a small person, though it only creates her one. Just a very random and thus maybe not well supported thought Rissa From foxmoth at qnet.com Mon Nov 22 14:51:21 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 14:51:21 -0000 Subject: Harry at the Dursleys In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118328 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "dumbledore11214" wrote: > > > Pippin: > The Dursleys do not act like the kind of abusive or neglectful > parents who are cruel and affectionate by turns, and expect their mistreated children to love them one day and can't be bothered with them the next. I think that Tom had a lot of treatment like that, and it made him paranoid. The Dursleys always treat Harry, and each other, the same way, so Harry learns to think that people are predictable. He didn't have anyone to love or trust at the Dursleys, but at least his ability to love and trust wasn't destroyed. Tom's was. > > > > Alla: > > Oh, I got it. You are arguing that being mistreated all the time is > better than being mistreated and being treated well in turns, > correct? I strongly disagree, but at least I understand. No, we > definitely don't see "circle of violence" in Dursleys' behaviour, > but why are they better because of that? > > Yes, Harry may have learned stability - in a negative way. > Stability, which should never be learned, IMO. > > > I most certainly don't see how such stability did not destroy > Harry's ability to love and trust. Pippin: Empirically, it didn't. But imagine a puppy that's kept in the yard, never petted, and kicked when it does something wrong. It will grow up fierce and surly, likely to snap (I initially wrote snape) at anything threatening, but in no danger of dying, and capable of being retrained once it was rescued. Its littermate, kept indoors, petted, disciplined with love, will grow to be a gentle loving pet. But imagine the third puppy, who's kicked one week and cherished the next. It grows up to be an untrainable neurotic mess, who can be utterly gentle one moment and rip your throat out without warning the next. That's Tom (with apologies to Heinlein in Citizen of the Galaxy). > Alla: > > I am sorry? Child who is afraid that he will die of hunger is not > miserable enough? I take exception to that, Pippin. And since that incident was horrible IMO, "never worse than that" really does not give much justification, IMO.< Pippin: I didn't express myself well. "All time" in "all time low" means exceeding all others up to the present time. Harry was not routinely locked in his room and starved. Corroboration for this is in PS/SS ch 7 "The Dursleys had never exactly starved Harry,but he'd never been allowed to eat as much as he liked. Dudley had always taken anything Harry really wanted, even if it made him sick." IMO, Rowling is observing, in her satirical way, that Harry was healthier for being forced to undereat slightly than being allowed to stuff himself as Dudley was, just as he was healthier for being made to do cleaning and yard work than being allowed to sit in front of the TV and play video games all day long. Pippin who can feel countless generations of Yiddische mama ancestors cringing. What, you only had six pieces? You'll starve! But in other cultures, privation is supposed to be good for you. From quigonginger at yahoo.com Mon Nov 22 16:02:26 2004 From: quigonginger at yahoo.com (quigonginger) Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 16:02:26 -0000 Subject: CHAPTER DISCUSSION: ch. 32 "Out of the Fire" Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118329 Previously, in "The Order of the Phoenix": Harry had been taking his History OWL when he had a vision of Sirius being held captive in the MOM by LV. We join our hero as he comes to and attempts to make an early exit from the class. Ch. 32 "Out of the Fire" Prof. Tofty takes Harry from the exam room, chalking his experience up to exam nerves. He kindly suggests that Harry take to his bed. Harry agrees, but instead heads off to the hospital wing in the hopes of telling Prof. McGonnagal what has happened. Upon arriving in the hospital wing, Harry is surprised to find only Madam Pomphrey and Montague. He learns that Prof. M has been taken to St. Mungo's. Harry panics as he deduces with his usual accuracy that there are no more members of the order left at Hogwarts. He finds Ron and Hermione, who have finished their exams and are quite worried about him. They dart into a conveniently empty classroom and Harry tells them what he has seen. Hermione attempts to use logic to convince Harry that his vision may not be all that accurate. He insists that it is. Hermione responds with her now-infamous "saving people" line. Harry is further angered, and the three procede to argue "fiercely" and "heatedly". Ginny and Luna enter the scene, attracted by the large amount of capital letters emerging from Harry's mouth. When Harry answers her "roughly", Ginny tells him "cooly" that he needn't take that tone with her. She asks if she can help. Harry is not in the mood to accept her offer, but Hermione, suddenly taking another tack, suggests that Ginny and Luna can help. Hermione suggests that they first check at 12 Grimmauld place to be certain that Sirius is really not there. This angers Harry, but a pleading Hermione persuades Harry to listen to her plan. Harry is to get his Invisibility Cloak from his room and meet her outside Umbridge's office as it is the only unguarded fireplace in Hogwarts. He leaves at once, and meets up with the others outside Umbridge's office. Ron goes to head off Umbridge by telling her that Peeves is smashing up the Transfiguration room. Ginny and Luna are to guard the corridor by Umbridge's office to make sure that no one sees Harry and Hermione enter, and to give a signal if anyone shows up. Ginny immediately suggests that she and Luna can tell people that someone let off Garroting Gas. Hermione is amazed that Ginny thought of this so quickly, but Ginny shrugs it off, saying that Fred and George had once thought of doing it. Harry and Hermione have no problem getting into the office using Sirius' knife as Ginny plays her role well, telling people "in a convincingly exasperated voice" about the Garroting Gas. Although they had worried that Umbridge would have put extra protection around her office after the second niffler incident, this doesn't seem to be the case. When Harry's head arrives at 12 Grimmauld place, it is empty. (The kitchen, not Harry's head.) He calls out and is answered by Kreacher, who has heavily bandaged hands. Harry interrogates Kreacher, who is not forthcoming until Harry asks if Sirius has gone to the Dept. of Mysteries. Kreacher states that Sirius will not come back from the Dept. of Mysteries, and that Kreacher and his mistress are alone again. Kreacher is quite cheerful about this. Harry is forced out of the fireplace by an angry Umbrigde. It seems she has indeed put up extra secutiry after all. Hermione is being held by Millicent Bulstrode, and Draco takes Harry's wand. Ron, Ginny, Luna and Neville (who tried to defend Ginny) have also been taken by members of the Inquisitorial Squad. After getting no truth from Harry as to why he was in her fireplace, Umbridge asks Draco to fetch Prof. Snape. Harry realizes that McG hadn't been his only hope to reach the Order. As Prof. Snape arrives, Harry wills him (Snape) to read his (Harry's) thoughts. Umbridge asks Snape for more veritaserum, but he can't comply as he has already given her his last bottle. He does kindly offer her poison, but warns her that it would act too quickly to get a confession out of him. Umbridge places Snape on probation, and he starts to leave. Seizing his last chance, Harry shouts "He's got Padfoot in the place where it's hidden." Prof. Snape feigns incomprehension, and leaves, pausing to tell Crabbe to loosen his hold on Neville. As Umbridge is about to use the Cruciatus curse to make Harry talk, Hermione promises to tell all. Sobbing first into Millicent's robes, and then into her hands to hide the lack of tears, she tells Umbridge that they were trying to contact Prof. Dumbledore to tell him they had finished the weapon. Umbridge demands that Hermione and Harry take her to it, leaving the Inquisitorial Squad to guard the others. Tune in next time to hear Umbridge say "AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAGH" Discussion Questions: Note: I have listed a few possibilities with each question. These are only a springboard for your mind. Feel free to add your own ideas. I'm anxious to hear them! Ginny has been noticed lying easily before. (Telling her mother that Crookshanks had been playing with Dungbombs when it was she using them.) In this chapter, she comes up with the Garroting Gas lie quickly, but says it was F&G's idea. Later, she is very convincing when telling the other students about the Gas. 1) Do you think that F&G really intended to use what seems to be a fatal substance for a prank? Or was Ginny lying about that too? 2) If Ginny continues in this vein, will she be a potential asset to the group? Will she be good enough to fool LV, for example? Or another Legilimans? Or will she be a potential liability? 3) This is the second time that Ginny is able to cut Harry off mid- pique. (The first being when she points out that she too knows what it is like to be possessed.) Does this speak for her character? Or is it that she is someone outside the trio, so Harry is not as used to her comments? Or (I'm gonna kick myself for asking this) could it have shipping implications? 4) At the time Harry talked to Kreacher, Sirius is tending Buckbeak, whom Kreacher has injured. Kreacher tells Harry that Sirius has gone out. After Harry specifically asks about the D of M, Kreacher gleefully tells him that Sirius will not return. What do you think Kreacher's role is in the set-up, and how did he know what he would be required to do? (To explain: Did LV know that Harry would check out #12? Did he tell Kreacher what info to give and what to withhold? Is Kreacher reporting back to LV? And by LV, I mean all his evil henchpersons as well.) 5) Umbridge says she is going to loosen Harry's tongue with the Cruciatus curse. She is pointing her wand at Harry. Knowing Harry's tolerance for the Quill, don't you think she would have gotten the truth out of him more easily by torturing one of his friends and making him watch? Or does she not understand love between friends? Or did she choose to curse Harry in the hopes that one of his weaker friends would crack to spare Harry the pain? 6) What do you think of Snape's actions? He managed to warn Harry that she had used veritaserum on him once, which should have put Harry on his guard. He played up to Umbridge without being any help whatsoever. (And got in some delightfully snarky comments as well.) He saved Neville from choking with another snarky comment to Crabbe. Do you think he could have given Harry a clue that he understood him? Or would that have been too risky as Umbrigde had just seen through him enough to put him on probation? Any other thoughts? Feel free! Please read the note below. I managed to copy and paste right on the first try. * * * 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 * * * Ginger, thanking everyone for reading. From willsonkmom at msn.com Mon Nov 22 16:37:26 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 16:37:26 -0000 Subject: CHAPTER DISCUSSION: ch. 32 "Out of the Fire" In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118330 Ginger wrote: > > 3) This is the second time that Ginny is able to cut Harry off mid- > pique. (The first being when she points out that she too knows what > it is like to be possessed.) Does this speak for her character? Or > is it that she is someone outside the trio, so Harry is not as used > to her comments? Or (I'm gonna kick myself for asking this) could it > have shipping implications? Potioncat: I'm going to kick myself for answering, but she does "deflate his head" a bit doesn't she? > > > 5) Umbridge says she is going to loosen Harry's tongue with the > Cruciatus curse. She is pointing her wand at Harry. Knowing Harry's > tolerance for the Quill, don't you think she would have gotten the > truth out of him more easily by torturing one of his friends and > making him watch? Or does she not understand love between friends? > Or did she choose to curse Harry in the hopes that one of his weaker > friends would crack to spare Harry the pain? Potioncat: Well, I'm just glad you aren't Umbridge! > > 6) What do you think of Snape's actions? He managed to warn Harry > that she had used veritaserum on him once, which should have put > Harry on his guard. He played up to Umbridge without being any help > whatsoever. (And got in some delightfully snarky comments as well.) > He saved Neville from choking with another snarky comment to Crabbe. > Do you think he could have given Harry a clue that he understood > him? Or would that have been too risky as Umbrigde had just seen > through him enough to put him on probation? Potioncat: I'm not sure what's going on. Snape stops, turns and looks Harry in the eye. Maybe that was his clue. He also made reference to a Babbling Beverage. (I don't know if one was ever mentioned before, couldn't find one in the Lexicon.) And I'm not sure if that was a clue or just buying time. Just the fact that Harry knows Snape is in the order, and Snape tells Crabbe to let up on Neville...was that his way of saying he was helping? I would say that I'm a little disappointed that Snape didn't listen in for a few moments after he walked out. What would he have done if he had known Umbridge was going to use the cruciatus? Great discussion! From stevejjen at earthlink.net Mon Nov 22 17:04:23 2004 From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese) Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 17:04:23 -0000 Subject: CHAPTER DISCUSSION: ch. 32 "Out of the Fire" In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118331 Thanks Ginger, for a very entertaining chapter discussion! You said: > 4) At the time Harry talked to Kreacher, Sirius is tending Buckbeak, > whom Kreacher has injured. Kreacher tells Harry that Sirius has gone > out. After Harry specifically asks about the D of M, Kreacher > gleefully tells him that Sirius will not return. What do you think > Kreacher's role is in the set-up, and how did he know what he would > be required to do? (To explain: Did LV know that Harry would check > out #12? Did he tell Kreacher what info to give and what to > withhold? Is Kreacher reporting back to LV? And by LV, I mean all > his evil henchpersons as well.) Jen: This back-up plan was surprising to me on the first read- through. Why would LV, who is notoriously bad about back-up plans, think that Harry *wouldn't* rush off to the MOM after seeing the vision of Sirius? But no, Voldemort actually planned for the possibility that Harry wouldn't act in his typical way. The problem is, Lucius would know all the means for Harry to access #12 Grimmauld would be blocked by Umbridge. And then Umbridge and Draco almost ruin the whole back-up plan, so neither of them seem to be in on the ruse. So how exactly did LV expect his backup plan to work? One possibility is Umbridge was really in cahoots with Lucius, expecting Harry to try to access her office and therefore *appears* to fall for both the garroting gas trick and the "weapon" in the woods. Now I don't think Umbridge is a DE here, but instead she believes Lucius & Fudge are still working to get Harry expelled and of course she wants to help. Another thought is this: If Lucius truly isn't loyal to Voldemort, as some of us have postulated before, the whole "back-up" plan may be his and not Voldemort's. He didn't really *want* Harry to get to the DOM and give the Prophecy to Voldemort. So he engages Umbridge's cooperation with the "let's get Harry expelled scenario" and convinces Umbridge that she can use any means necessary to keep Harry at Hogwarts, even the Cruciatus, and Fudge will do nothing to about it. Ginger: > 6) What do you think of Snape's actions? He managed to warn Harry > that she had used veritaserum on him once, which should have put > Harry on his guard. He played up to Umbridge without being any help > whatsoever. (And got in some delightfully snarky comments as well.) > He saved Neville from choking with another snarky comment to Crabbe. > Do you think he could have given Harry a clue that he understood > him? Or would that have been too risky as Umbrigde had just seen > through him enough to put him on probation? Jen: Snape's such a smart guy. I think if he understood in that moment exactly what Harry meant with his cryptic comments, he would have found a way to get that message across to Harry. A very slight nod before leaving, a cynical remark about dogs, something! Either Snape didn't understand the comment right away or his past feeling about Sirius and James interfered again here, making it impossible for him to acknowledge what Harry said. Snape (of all people!) understands how 'rash and reckless' Harry can be. Surely, surely if Snape knew a small nod could keep Harry from causing more trouble, he would find a way to make that happen. Jen Reese From jlnbtr at yahoo.com Mon Nov 22 16:53:41 2004 From: jlnbtr at yahoo.com (Juli) Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 08:53:41 -0800 (PST) Subject: CHAPTER DISCUSSION: ch. 32 "Out of the Fire" In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041122165341.93438.qmail@web53109.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 118332 Ginger: > 1) Do you think that F&G really intended to use > what seems to be a > fatal substance for a prank? Or was Ginny lying > about that too? I don't think F&G would do anything to harm, really harm any student, they know when to stop (OoP, "we've never been kicked out" and then "We didn't want to mess study time" quoting from memory), I believe they act against the institution not the school itself nor the teachers, except after DD leaves. Maybe they intended to use some sort of gas in DU's office, not a lethal gas but some other type. > 2) If Ginny continues in this vein, will she be a > potential asset to > the group? Will she be good enough to fool LV, for > example? Or > another Legilimans? Or will she be a potential > liability? I believe neither Ron or Harry will ever let Ginny join them in their dangerous adventures, they both seem to look after her in a sisterly way, But we already know she has the vein to be a member of the Trio (our Foursome?), but will they ever let her? I don't think so. > 4) (To explain: Did LV know that > Harry would check > out #12? Did he tell Kreacher what info to give and > what to > withhold? Is Kreacher reporting back to LV? And by > LV, I mean all > his evil henchpersons as well.) Voldemort was just making sure he was covered, we know that krecher was spying for the Malfoys in the Order, so he was acting on Narcissa's orders, she must have told him to hurt bockbeack so Sirius would be upstairs taking care of him. This way if Harry decided to check first at 12 GP, Kreacher would just lie to his face. > 5) Umbridge says she is going to loosen Harry's > tongue with the > Cruciatus curse. She is pointing her wand at Harry. > Knowing Harry's > tolerance for the Quill, don't you think she would > have gotten the > truth out of him more easily by torturing one of his > friends and > making him watch? Or does she not understand love > between friends? > Or did she choose to curse Harry in the hopes that > one of his weaker > friends would crack to spare Harry the pain? That would have been the smart choice, Crucioing (right verb?) someone else, say Neville for exemple who she must have known the story. Harry would never allow it, remember his face on DADA and the unforgiveable curses? > 6) What do you think of Snape's actions? Snape acted the best he could, he couldn't admit he understood Harry in front of the DEs' sons, just plain stupid, so he acted as he always did and like DD told us latter, then he contacted Sirius and the Order Juli From Vivamus at TaprootTech.com Mon Nov 22 17:13:10 2004 From: Vivamus at TaprootTech.com (Vivamus) Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 12:13:10 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Harry at the Dursleys In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041122121331.SM01820@DEVBOX> No: HPFGUIDX 118333 > Pippin: > James instructed Lily to "Take Harry and go! It's him! Go! Run! I'll > hold him off." Clearly he had some means of escape in mind. > But Harry was in his cot when Lily died (per the website), so she > wasn't fleeing the house with him when she died. Knowing that > Voldemort would never stop hunting Harry, she chose to give up > her life, and the love and the home she could have made for > him, in order to give him the blood protection. Since this is > ancient magic, it is something she could have known about. > Dumbledore understood what she had done, and honored her > sacrifice by taking Harry to live with the Dursleys. > > Of course you could read it otherwise. But I think it is JKR's > purpose at this point in the story to allow us multiple > interpretations, and force us to ask, What is goodness? What > sort of sacrifice could be so powerful? rather than spoon feeding > us the answers. Vivamus: I'm with you on this, Pippin. Much is being made of the fact that Harry suffered at the hands of the Dursleys, but there seems to be an assumption that all suffering is bad. Growing up seems to be painful in nearly all circumstances, and the last thing you would want for a child raised from birth to fight a desperate battle is to have that child protected from all pain. I also do not buy the argument that "DD put Harry there so the Dursleys would be nasty to him and make him stronger." That would be practical, but not good, and JKR has told us directly of DD's goodness. I think, as you stated, that he put Harry there because of Lily's choice, but I also think he suspected the Dursleys were going to be unpleasant to him. OTOH, he had no way of knowing they would be as nasty as they turned out to be. For those who are thinking that leaving Harry at the Dursleys was an evil act, I cannot speak for Harry, but can say that, as one who grew up with abject abuse, that stability and consistency were far more important to me than the particular pain of the moment. One thing about waking up every morning and wondering if you will die that day is that you are extremely jumpy about anything new. You can survive almost anything and recover from it, but you desperately need the world to be consistent if you are going to maintain some sanity. As nasty as the Dursleys are, they really are quite consistent. And so Harry, in living with them, really does learn some of the values he needs to fight LV. I'm sure DD did a lot of watching and worrying, but really, what could he do? He threatened Petunia when they were finally going to kick Harry out, because he had no choice there. From mgrantwich at yahoo.com Mon Nov 22 18:05:02 2004 From: mgrantwich at yahoo.com (Magda Grantwich) Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 10:05:02 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: The length of the Pensieve Scene In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041122180503.43973.qmail@web53104.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 118334 > Pippin: > > Anyway, I think there is an interpretation being missed here. > When Sirius says "I'm not proud of it," and JKR underlines that by > having Lupin give him a quick look, it's because there's been a > change. In the Shrieking Shack, Sirius defended his attack on > Snape "It served him right. Sneaking around, trying to find out > what we were up to...hoping he could get us expelled." > > But Sirius has grown up a bit in the two years since he said that, > and though he still doesn't like Snape, he's not blaming the > victim any longer. Harry doesn't notice this because he's > invested in seeing Sirius as the victim of Snape's goading, but > Sirius has started to outgrow his old feelings toward Snape. I agree but I don't think it's over the past two years - I think its more like the past few months. Snape has doubtless been reporting to Dumbledore and the Order about Harry's (lack of) progress in his occlumency lessons. I can see Remus making a point of talking to Sirius about how their old grudge is having a detrimental effect on Harry and that all Sirius/Snape squabbling has to be kept away from Harry. (I'm sure that Remus had a LOT to say when he heard about the Snape/Sirius near-brawl at Christmastime.) Yet another frustration and burden to pile on Sirius. Magda __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? The all-new My Yahoo! - Get yours free! http://my.yahoo.com From Vivamus at TaprootTech.com Mon Nov 22 18:13:52 2004 From: Vivamus at TaprootTech.com (Vivamus) Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 13:13:52 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] CHAPTER DISCUSSION: ch. 32 "Out of the Fire" In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200411221314555.SM01820@DEVBOX> No: HPFGUIDX 118335 Nice post, Ginger > Previously, in "The Order of the Phoenix": > Umbridge demands that Hermione and Harry > take her to it, leaving the Inquisitorial Squad to guard the others. Vivamus: It still begs the question, of course, of just HOW they managed to escape the Inquisitorial Squad. Wandless and held by a larger number of people bigger than they are, they must have done something pretty spectacular to get away. I'm guessing Luna did something typically weird and *apparently* stupid, Neville used the chance to try to break free, creating a real distraction, allowing Ginny to get her hand on her wand and get control of things. > Ginny has been noticed lying easily before. (Telling her mother that > Crookshanks had been playing with Dungbombs when it was she using > them.) In this chapter, she comes up with the Garroting Gas lie > quickly, but says it was F&G's idea. Later, she is very convincing > when telling the other students about the Gas. > > 1) Do you think that F&G really intended to use what seems to be a > fatal substance for a prank? Or was Ginny lying about that too? Vivamus: They would not, although they might well have talked about it, then come up with a version that choked you until you passed out, then completely covered you with iridescent purple ectoplasm. > 2) If Ginny continues in this vein, will she be a potential asset to > the group? Will she be good enough to fool LV, for example? Or > another Legilimans? Or will she be a potential liability? Vivamus: I think, power-wise, she is a very close match to Harry, and way beyond either Ron or Hermione. > 3) This is the second time that Ginny is able to cut Harry off mid- > pique. (The first being when she points out that she too knows what > it is like to be possessed.) Does this speak for her character? Or > is it that she is someone outside the trio, so Harry is not as used > to her comments? Or (I'm gonna kick myself for asking this) could it > have shipping implications? Vivamus: I think both of those are reminders that Ginny actually has more in common with Harry than almost anyone else, not only from the close association Harry has with her family, but from the fact that Voldemort put part of himself in each of them. Ginny comes across as tough, smart, funny, and lively. Hmm, if JKR were preparing someone to be a match for Harry, what would she look/act like? A pretty-but-delicate flower who can't handle blood and guts, or someone with the sense of fun and mental toughness of Fred and George, and courage the match of Harry's? When Ginny puts Harry in his place, by (1) cutting him off in mid-tantrum, (2) being very cool when Harry treats her like a little girl, and (3) "giving up" on Harry to have relationships with other boys, it changes her from a doting little girl to an equal character in Harry's eyes. Going into the MoM to fight the DEs has to have a profound effect on all the DA members who went. You don't go through a life-and-death battle without being personally changed, as well as having lifelong bonds with your friends who fought with you. It looks to me as if Ginny is being built up in preparation for a real relationship with Harry. Think about Fred and George's speaking of her with something like awe when talking about her "bat-bogey hex." Those two are not easy to impress. They treat Ron with an elder sibling's typical contempt, but give the impression that they *really* don't want to mess with Ginny. I'm still waiting for it to come out that Ginny is a parselmouth. > 5) Umbridge says she is going to loosen Harry's tongue with the > Cruciatus curse. She is pointing her wand at Harry. Knowing Harry's > tolerance for the Quill, don't you think she would have gotten the > truth out of him more easily by torturing one of his friends and > making him watch? Or does she not understand love between friends? > Or did she choose to curse Harry in the hopes that one of his weaker > friends would crack to spare Harry the pain? Vivamus: I don't thing DU was smart enough to think of that. LV would have done it as a matter of course -- not because he shares those emotions, but because he despises them. DU just wanted to torture Harry, since he was the principal thorn in her side after DD -- and really, it was a way to get back at DD by attacking his precious Harry. > 6) What do you think of Snape's actions? He managed to warn Harry > that she had used veritaserum on him once, which should have put > Harry on his guard. He played up to Umbridge without being any help > whatsoever. (And got in some delightfully snarky comments as well.) > He saved Neville from choking with another snarky comment to Crabbe. > Do you think he could have given Harry a clue that he understood > him? Or would that have been too risky as Umbrigde had just seen > through him enough to put him on probation? Vivamus: I think it would have been way too risky to do anything other than he did. Harry might well have put Snape's life in danger with that comment. It was pretty stupid of him to do it that way, y'know. He could have said it looking at the floor just as well, and no one else would have realized he was talking to Snape. Now, if DU gets recruited by the DEs, LV might just learn that Harry was telling Severus that LV had Sirius where the prophecy was hidden. The only reason that could possibly be is that Snape is working for the Order. Vivamus From mgrantwich at yahoo.com Mon Nov 22 18:19:06 2004 From: mgrantwich at yahoo.com (Magda Grantwich) Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 10:19:06 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Harry at the Dursleys In-Reply-To: <20041122022825.23086.qmail@web53101.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041122181906.57433.qmail@web53104.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 118336 > "Dobby might have saved Harry from horrible happenings at > Hogwarts, but the way things were going, he'd probably starve to > death anyway" - CoS, p.22, paperback. > > Pippin: > > > Miserable, yes, afraid he might die, yes, but not so unhappy > that he wished he would. And what caused it? Interference from the > magical world, in the form of Dobby. > > Alla: > I am sorry? Child who is afraid that he will die of hunger is not > miserable enough? Alla, that's not what Pippin said. Harry isn't laying on his bed WISHING he were dead; he's contemplating his situation. Nor did Pippen say that Harry "is not miserable enough". I believe that JKR meant us not to take that line LITERALLY, not to believe that Harry really did think he'd starve to death. How many times have you heard kids say (or you say yourself when you were a kid) "My mom's going to KILL me for doing that!" Did you really believe your mom was going to kill you? It was an expression, to hightlight an intense feeling. I agree with Pippen that we're exaggerating the Dursleys' "abuse". They're jerks. Harry's not happy there. No question. But this is not a series about an abused child. Whether we think JKR is playing down Harry's childhood traumsas or not, we just have to accept somethings so we can get on with the books. Magda __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? The all-new My Yahoo! - Get yours free! http://my.yahoo.com From nrenka at yahoo.com Mon Nov 22 18:51:39 2004 From: nrenka at yahoo.com (nrenka) Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 18:51:39 -0000 Subject: Plot in OotP (wand confusion) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118337 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "pippin_999" wrote: > Pippin: > I know two Wormtails sounds unlikely, but just imagine that GoF > had come out as a serial. Would you have been prepared to > believe after The Egg and The Eye chapter that 'Bartemius > Crouch' wasn't the Ministry official we had met, but another > character we hadn't even heard of so far? And yet, if someone > had asked, "Was it really Barty Crouch that Harry saw burgling > Snape's office?" what would JKR have answered except, > "Correct." Correct me if I'm wrong, Pippin, because I'm away from my books--but doesn't Sirius mention that Barty Crouch Sr. sent his own son to jail, in the conversation in the cave? And talk about how he didn't last long, but died? So, in a sense, we've been set up--what is the sneaky revelation is that Barty Jr. is still alive, and has been smuggled out. This comes after The Egg and the Eye, so in a sense, there we've been GIVEN the information we need--we just don't know what we have. It's sneaky, yes, but it's also been *explicitly* prepared, so that when the true answer comes to light, we have something to flash back to, something very very definite which has become fully comprehensible, and go "Oh..." Now, if you'd like to cite me where, textually, this is explicitly and clearly done for Wormtail!Lupin, I would love to see it so that I can be prepared for the ultimate revelation. :) -Nora goes back on vacation, which means reading less...fun things From foxmoth at qnet.com Mon Nov 22 19:02:14 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 19:02:14 -0000 Subject: CHAPTER DISCUSSION: ch. 32 "Out of the Fire" In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118338 > Discussion Questions: > > Note: I have listed a few possibilities with each question. These > are only a springboard for your mind. Feel free to add your own > ideas. I'm anxious to hear them! > > Ginny has been noticed lying easily before. (Telling her mother that Crookshanks had been playing with Dungbombs when it was she using them.) In this chapter, she comes up with the Garroting Gas lie quickly, but says it was F&G's idea. Later, she is very convincing when telling the other students about the Gas. > > 1) Do you think that F&G really intended to use what seems to be a fatal substance for a prank? Or was Ginny lying about that too?< Pippin: I think they might have planned a similar ruse in order to clear a corridor. > 4) At the time Harry talked to Kreacher, Sirius is tending Buckbeak, whom Kreacher has injured. Kreacher tells Harry that Sirius has gone out. After Harry specifically asks about the D of M, Kreacher gleefully tells him that Sirius will not return. What do you think Kreacher's role is in the set-up, and how did he know what he would be required to do? (To explain: Did LV know that Harry would check out #12? Did he tell Kreacher what info to give and what to withhold? Is Kreacher reporting back to LV? And by LV, I mean all his evil henchpersons as well.)< What about Professor Tofty as ESE? His name sounds suspiciously like toffee, as in Fudge (though "toft" is an old word meaning hillock). Marchbanks is proctoring the exam, but when Harry comes to it's Tofty that's looking after him and tells him to go to bed instead of seeing that he gets to the hospital wing. Professor Tofty was also suspiciously interested in Harry's patronus. Wanted to see it for himself. Could Tofty also be responsible for the turn for the worse that took McGonagall to St. Mungo's? And could he also have notified LV that Harry had passed out? Suppose Tofty communicated by some secret means with Voldemort's agent at GP (not Kreacher, who might be forced to talk by Sirius). The agent signalled Kreacher to injure Buckbeak. Tofty also sent Filch to tell Umbridge that Peeves was blacking the eyepieces of the telescopes, hoping to decoy her to the top of the astronomy tower, so that Harry would have a clear shot at the fireplace. But this plan was nearly undone by Ron's lie about Peeves smashing up the transfiguration department. Pippin who thinks it highly unlikely that Harry would have believed Snape, no matter what Snape said. If Harry wouldn't even believe Hermione,no way would he have believed Snape. From annemehr at yahoo.com Mon Nov 22 19:03:55 2004 From: annemehr at yahoo.com (annemehr) Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 19:03:55 -0000 Subject: Harry at the Dursleys In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118339 Pippin: > IMO, Rowling is observing, in her satirical way, that Harry was > healthier for being forced to undereat slightly than being allowed > to stuff himself as Dudley was, just as he was healthier for being > made to do cleaning and yard work than being allowed to sit in > front of the TV and play video games all day long. Annemehr: And this is the real crux of the argument, isn't it? Who is there who doesn't think Harry is better off than Dudley? So Dumbledore saved his life *and* he was raised better than the pampered little prince. I know. One can't help but think it could have been so much better. But I agree that wizarding interference with the Dursleys could have been catastrophic. Sure, Lupin, Mad Eye, et al could afford to do it at the end of OoP, but that's because Harry has so much more power in that household now compared to when he was little. > Pippin > who can feel countless generations of Yiddische mama > ancestors cringing. What, you only had six pieces? You'll > starve! But in other cultures, privation is supposed to be good for > you. Annemehr: Well, you may be able to appease them by reading from passages about the Burrow, and Ma Weasley trying to force Harry to eat fourth helpings at every meal. Supplement that with a few Hogwarts feast scenes... From foxmoth at qnet.com Mon Nov 22 20:27:31 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 20:27:31 -0000 Subject: Plot in OotP (wand confusion) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118340 Nora: > > Correct me if I'm wrong, Pippin, because I'm away from my books--but doesn't Sirius mention that Barty Crouch Sr. sent his own son to jail, in the conversation in the cave? And talk about how he didn't last long, but died? So, in a sense, we've been set up--what is the sneaky revelation is that Barty Jr. is still alive, and has been smuggled out. This comes after The Egg and the Eye, so in a sense, there we've been GIVEN the information we need--we just don't know what we have. > > It's sneaky, yes, but it's also been *explicitly* prepared, so that when the true answer comes to light, we have something to flash back to, something very very definite which has become fully comprehensible, and go "Oh..." > > Now, if you'd like to cite me where, textually, this is explicitly > and clearly done for Wormtail!Lupin, I would love to see it so that I can be prepared for the ultimate revelation. :) Pippin: I'm not sure what you mean by "*explicitly* prepared". Sirius never refers to young Barty by name. It's 'Crouch's son' all the way through his account, and young Crouch, like the other people in the Pensieve scene, is never named there either. Our clue to young Barty's name is way back in GOF chapter one, where we learn that the senior Riddles had a grown up son named Tom -- very confusing, since this Tom is the father of the Tom Riddle who will become Lord Voldemort. JKR doesn't explain that explicitly either; you have to work it out, though it helps to remember that Tom Riddle said in CoS that he was named after his father. In the same way, we have Mark Evans, of no importance in our story except to show that unrelated persons can have the same name. And where should he appear but in the first chapter of OOP? The next clue to Barty is that Sirius tells us that it doesn't make sense that Crouch was in Snape's office. He couldn't have apparated there and he's supposedly too ill to go into work. It's also strange that he would drag himself to Hogwarts in secret when he could visit openly as a tri-wizard judge. That *should* have tipped us off, but we don't know that there are two Barty's yet, and we're thinking it has to be the Barty we know, because the Marauder's Map never lies. The next Wormtail clue is also parallel. As various posters besides me have pointed out, it doesn't make sense that Wormtail/Peter AK'd Cedric. Peter didn't have his wand in his hand as he approached, and is notably not dextrous. He's burdened with baby Voldy. How could he possibly have gotten his wand out and said the spell before Cedric countered with Expelliarmus? As Harry says in OOP, Cedric knew his defensive spells -- the proof is he got through the maze. That's explicit, isn't it? Peter's no duellist, we've been told. That's explicit, too. *Maybe* he could have blown up the Muggles in a sneak attack, but this time he was facing his adversary. We don't find out Fake!Moody's real name until *after* Fake!Moody has been exposed and the use of polyjuice has been revealed. Snape announces it from the doorway when he returns with Winky. If we are shrewd we can realize that Dumbledore has already guessed, since he sent for Winky before the polyjuice wore off. And that errand was our final clue, just a few pages before JKR let the kneazle out of the bag. It would take a lot of will power to stop reading then, and say to yourself, "Ooooh -- the Marauder's Map never lies, so the impostor must be named Bartemius Crouch! I bet he's Barty's son-- guess he was a Death Eater, after all." It would be an educated guess, not an Ellery Queen style deduction, because you can't *prove* that the impostor is young Barty until the spell wears off and Snape identifies him. My educated guess is that there are two Wormtails. But we probably don't have all the clues yet. Pippin From nkafkafi at yahoo.com Mon Nov 22 20:29:54 2004 From: nkafkafi at yahoo.com (nkafkafi) Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 20:29:54 -0000 Subject: Plot in OotP (wand confusion) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118341 > > Pippin: > > I know two Wormtails sounds unlikely, but just imagine that GoF > > had come out as a serial. Would you have been prepared to > > believe after The Egg and The Eye chapter that 'Bartemius > > Crouch' wasn't the Ministry official we had met, but another > > character we hadn't even heard of so far? And yet, if someone > > had asked, "Was it really Barty Crouch that Harry saw burgling > > Snape's office?" what would JKR have answered except, > > "Correct." > > Nora: > Correct me if I'm wrong, Pippin, because I'm away from my books-- but > doesn't Sirius mention that Barty Crouch Sr. sent his own son to > jail, in the conversation in the cave? And talk about how he didn't > last long, but died? So, in a sense, we've been set up--what is the > sneaky revelation is that Barty Jr. is still alive, and has been > smuggled out. This comes after The Egg and the Eye, so in a sense, > there we've been GIVEN the information we need--we just don't know > what we have. > > It's sneaky, yes, but it's also been *explicitly* prepared, so that > when the true answer comes to light, we have something to flash back > to, something very very definite which has become fully > comprehensible, and go "Oh..." > > Now, if you'd like to cite me where, textually, this is explicitly > and clearly done for Wormtail!Lupin, I would love to see it so that > I can be prepared for the ultimate revelation. :) Neri: Nora mentioned that in the "Barty Crouch" case JKR gave us a clue. I'd add that JKR also gave us the riddle. That is, Harry saw the name "Barty Crouch" in the map visiting Snape's office, and the question "what did Barty Crouch do in Snape's office" was presented to the reader as a mystery to be solved. But in the Wormtail!Lupin case, not only we don't have a clue, we don't even have the riddle. Pippin actually suggests that JKR has arranged for Lupin to be also called Wormtail, only in order to cover the off chance that a fan will ask her in a chat "did Wormtail kill Cedric?" and she will be able to answer him "correct!" And what would have happened if this fan had asked her "did Peter kill Cedric" or "did Pettigrew kill Cedric"? Did she also prepare some backstory to cover these possibilities? Or perhaps the fan who asked this question was JKR's agent?! Looks like the conspiracy theories start leaking from the plot into RW. Neri From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Mon Nov 22 21:29:57 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 21:29:57 -0000 Subject: Harry at the Dursleys In-Reply-To: <20041122181906.57433.qmail@web53104.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118342 Magda: > Alla, that's not what Pippin said. Harry isn't laying on his bed > WISHING he were dead; he's contemplating his situation. Nor did > Pippen say that Harry "is not miserable enough". Alla: Yes, I know Harry is not wishing that he were dead, but to me it is horrible enough that he is afraid that he will die. I believe that it is real to him, I believe that he is THAT hungry. Magda: > I agree with Pippen that we're exaggerating the Dursleys' "abuse". > They're jerks. Harry's not happy there. No question. But this is > not a series about an abused child. Whether we think JKR is playing > down Harry's childhood traumsas or not, we just have to accept > somethings so we can get on with the books. Alla: I can get on with the books perfectly well, thinking that Harry IS abused child. Of course there is a fairy tale aspect about it, but there is ALSO realistic aspect to it. Whether Rowling follow up on it or not, we will see, but I happen to think that abuse theme is there and quite strong at that. From foxmoth at qnet.com Mon Nov 22 21:35:52 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 21:35:52 -0000 Subject: Two Wormtails was Re: Plot in OotP (wand confusion) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118343 Neri: > Pippin actually suggests that JKR has arranged for Lupin to be also called Wormtail, only in order to cover the off chance that a fan will ask her in a chat "did Wormtail kill Cedric?" and she will be able to answer him "correct!" > > And what would have happened if this fan had asked her "did Peter kill Cedric" or "did Pettigrew kill Cedric"? Did she also prepare> some backstory to cover these possibilities? > > Or perhaps the fan who asked this question was JKR's agent?! > > Looks like the conspiracy theories start leaking from the plot into RW.< Pippin: Yikes! Of course she picks which chat questions she'll answer. Otherwise anybody could have sent a message to ten thousand screens asking her how it feels to be leading thousands of innocent children into the arms of Satan, or some such nonsense. The theory is that Voldemort used the code name Wormtail for his spy Lupin in Voldemort War One, in order to taunt James and mislead Dumbledore. It is doubtful that any of Voldemort's agents, including Snape, knew who this "Wormtail" really was. If Snape was quite sure that it couldn't have been the real Wormtail (Peter), it would explain why he refused to listen in PoA. That Sirius made Peter the secret-keeper and Voldemort found out about it would be of course an incredible stroke of luck for Voldie, but planned as part of the plot by JKR from the beginning. I can hardly believe that JKR, a human rights activist, would like us to think in the end that a confession extracted under threat of force is wholly credible. Peter betrayed the secret, but is there, aside from that confession, a shred of evidence that he was the spy? At the rebirthing party, Voldemort has Peter appear unmasked and calls him Wormtail before all the assembled (Snape is conveniently absent) just to make sure everybody knows that Peter Pettigrew is the one and only Wormtail. And he proceeds to tell them how Wormtail, with a presence of mind that Voldemort could hardly have expected of him, brought him Bertha Jorkins. I fancy it was the other Wormtail that did that. Probably Lupin saw Bertha, realized she would be useful, and made Peter lure her out into the woods "on a night-time stroll." Hmmm, I wonder if it was full moon? Pippin From kethryn at wulfkub.com Mon Nov 22 21:44:28 2004 From: kethryn at wulfkub.com (Kethryn) Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 16:44:28 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Harry at the Dursleys References: <20041122181906.57433.qmail@web53104.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <004701c4d0dc$7423c3e0$0402a8c0@carolina.rr.com> No: HPFGUIDX 118344 > > "Dobby might have saved Harry from horrible happenings at > > Hogwarts, but the way things were going, he'd probably starve to > > death anyway" - CoS, p.22, paperback. > > > > Pippin: > > > > Miserable, yes, afraid he might die, yes, but not so unhappy > > that he wished he would. And what caused it? Interference from the > > magical world, in the form of Dobby. > > > > Alla: > > I am sorry? Child who is afraid that he will die of hunger is not > > miserable enough? > > Alla, that's not what Pippin said. Harry isn't laying on his bed > WISHING he were dead; he's contemplating his situation. Nor did > Pippen say that Harry "is not miserable enough". > > I believe that JKR meant us not to take that line LITERALLY, not to > believe that Harry really did think he'd starve to death. How many > times have you heard kids say (or you say yourself when you were a > kid) "My mom's going to KILL me for doing that!" Did you really > believe your mom was going to kill you? It was an expression, to > hightlight an intense feeling. > > I agree with Pippen that we're exaggerating the Dursleys' "abuse". > They're jerks. Harry's not happy there. No question. But this is > not a series about an abused child. Whether we think JKR is playing > down Harry's childhood traumsas or not, we just have to accept > somethings so we can get on with the books. > > Magda Kethryn now - While I have always thought that the Dursleys are miserable jerks, I never saw that they quite passed the border line into what I would definatly consider to be child abuse (although I admit that Social Services would probably not agree with me). Let me try to explain why I feel this way. In The Sorcerer's Stone, on page 33, "They heard the click of the mail slot and flop of letters on the doormat. 'Get the main, Dudley,' said Uncle Vernon from behind his paper. 'Make Harry get it.' 'Ge the mail, Harry.' 'Make Dudley get it.' 'Poke him with your Smelting stick, Dudley.' Harry dodged the Smelting stick and went to get the mail." Ok, now obviously this is the first book but this is where the pattern developes. Harry replies to a direct order with defiance (of course, so does Dudley but he is the pampered Prince after all) and Vernon tells Dudley to poke him. Of course, Harry dodges it and I would bet money that Vernon knew Harry was going to dodge it, having seen Harry escape from Dudley in the past. I would call Vernon an 'enabler' at this point; he enables and encouraged Dudley to be a bully all throughout the books up to this point. Does that make Vernon abusive? Well that depends on your defination of the word. If anyone is abusive, it's Dudley but, for some reason, we never call it abuse when it is from child to child. We call it bullying or testing or other cute aphorisms but never abuse and we expect the bullied child to deal with it on their own (speaking from personal experience here) up until the child is coming home with bruises. The Dursleys treat Harry more like a servant than a son. There is something wrong with that, yes, but heck, I used to think that my parents used to treat us like servants to. They did, of course, but not to the extent that I remember and it was a part of the life lessons that we all have to learn (how to cook, how to clean, etc). Of course, in this day and age, Social Services would probably have come to the house at least once, especially if they could learn to read minds. I can't begin to tell you how many times I HATED my parents growing up. I thought they were mean, cruel, and definatly unusual but I most certainly was not an abused child. In our youth, when whatever is going on at the time is life or death (or so it seems), we all tend to blow things out of porportion and I think that is a great deal of what is going on in terms of the borderline abuse happening at the Dursleys and at the hands of Snape. Harry has blown things up a bit, just enough, to have us question what is really going on here and, since we only have his thoughts and not an outside observer, we have no idea that what he is telling us is entirely accurate. Therefore, while I do question the Dursley's and, to some extent, Snape's behavoir, I also take it with a grain of salt because I do remember blowing things completely out of porportion. Cleaning up after dinner was an ugly battle royal and I can definatly remember thinking that I would rather die than clean the bathroom on more than one occasion. So anyway, my thoughts on the matter. Kethryn - who knows that was kind of wandering stream of conscious writing (she is much too tired to write coherantly at the moment) and apologizes if it doesn't make a whole lot of sense. From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Mon Nov 22 21:44:39 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 21:44:39 -0000 Subject: Unfortunate!Peter In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118345 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Sharon" wrote: > Azriona wrote: > Forgive me if I'm wrong, but didn't we have a solid time frame at one > point? I could have sworn The Prank happened in their fifth > year...but to go back to the Pensieve Scene, I sort of doubt that it > occured before their OWLs (I would think that Sirius would have > steered clear of Severus after he tried to kill him). > > Because of that scene, I feel fairly confident now (and certain this > has been discused to death elsewhere) that The Prank happened in > sixth year. I don't think it would have happened before the Pensieve Scene, and therefore could not have happened before the boys mastered the Animagi spell. I don't think it could have happened in 7th year, because as prefect, Remus was on the fast track to becoming Head Boy. There had to be a reason for James to get Head Boy and not > Remus. Carol responds: Snape says that Sirius Black tried to kill him when he (Sirius) was sixteen. Since Snape is unlikely to know Sirius's exact birthday, he's probably going by his own age at the time and/or by the school year when all of the students would start out as sixteen-year-olds, i.e., sixth year. It can't have been seventh year, because Sirius would already have turned seventeen by September 1 of that year. So, yes, the so-called Prank almost certainly followed the Pensieve incident, which happened at the end of their fifth year. Quite possibly it (the "Prank") happened near the beginning of sixth year, when the pain of humiliation of the earlier incident was still fairly fresh in Severus's mind. It makes sense that he would have started following MWPP and found out about Remus going to the Shrieking Shack at that time, hoping to find out something he could use against them to pay them pack for his public humiliation. There are lots of holes in our knowledge, but we can at least be fairly certain that the Prank occurred in sixth year, I'm guessing early in the year rather than late. Carol From R.Vink2 at chello.nl Mon Nov 22 21:51:23 2004 From: R.Vink2 at chello.nl (Renee) Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 21:51:23 -0000 Subject: Plot in OotP (wand confusion) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118346 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "pippin_999" wrote: > > Nora: > > > > Correct me if I'm wrong, Pippin, because I'm away from my > books--but doesn't Sirius mention that Barty Crouch Sr. sent his > own son to jail, in the conversation in the cave? And talk about > how he didn't last long, but died? So, in a sense, we've been > set up--what is the sneaky revelation is that Barty Jr. is still > alive, > and has been smuggled out. This comes after The Egg and the > Eye, so in a sense, there we've been GIVEN the information we > need--we just don't know what we have. > > > > It's sneaky, yes, but it's also been *explicitly* prepared, so that > when the true answer comes to light, we have something to > flash back to, something very very definite which has become > fully comprehensible, and go "Oh..." > > > > Now, if you'd like to cite me where, textually, this is explicitly > > and clearly done for Wormtail!Lupin, I would love to see it so > that I can be prepared for the ultimate revelation. :) > > Pippin: > I'm not sure what you mean by "*explicitly* prepared". Sirius > never refers to young Barty by name. It's 'Crouch's son' all the > way through his account, and young Crouch, like the other > people in the Pensieve scene, is never named there either. > > Our clue to young Barty's name is way back in GOF chapter one, > where we learn that the senior Riddles had a grown up son > named Tom -- very confusing, since this Tom is the father of the > Tom Riddle who will become Lord Voldemort. JKR doesn't > explain that explicitly either; you have to work it out, though it > helps to remember that Tom Riddle said in CoS that he was > named after his father. > > > In the same way, we have Mark Evans, of no importance in our > story except to show that unrelated persons can have the same > name. And where should he appear but in the first chapter of > OOP? Renee: I don't recall Sirius using Crouch Jr's first name either, but I don't think it matters, because the analogy is skewed. Sons and fathers or uncles and nephews do have identical names occasionally; certain combinations simply run in certain families. And yes, in a series this size with such large numbers of characters it's only realistic if a few completely unrelated characters have the same, fairly common family name. That JKR admitted Mark wasn't surnamed Evans on purpose doesn't really matter here. In fact, it's irrelevant, because Wormtail is neither a family name nor a traditional first name particular to one specific family. It's a nickname, a deliberate choice based on a personal trait of the character in question (or, in Pettigrews case, on his animagus form). Though it isn't entirely impossible that there are two Wormtails in the series, pointing at the existence of two Barties Crouch is not a valid argument, as nicknames are of an entirely different order. To make the existence of a Wormtail II plausible, you'll have to come up with an argument, preferably canon-based, why this person would have exactly the same nickname as Peter Pettigrew the Rat Animagus (unless Wormtail is a common surname in Britain, of course.) If you think it's Lupin, you have to answer Nora's direct question, which I notice you don't do anywhere in your comment. Just arguing that Peter couldn't have AK-ed Cedric doesn't work. I see no reason why it would be impossible: as someone pointed out before it's perfectly possible to carry a baby-sized Voldie in the crook of one elbow, and it doesn't take a great deal of dexterity to pull out a wand with your opposite hand, if only the wand is in the right place to begin with. And why wouldn't it be? It seems only logical that Pettigrew would have a wand at hand, under the circumstances. Pippin: > My educated guess is that there are two Wormtails. But we > probably don't have all the clues yet. Renee: My uneducated guess would be that Wormtail II is really Wormtongue, magically transported from Middle-earth to the Potterworld. Harry simply misunderstood his name or stopped listening after *Worm-*, and JKR put him in to be able to pay homage to J.R.R. Tolkien once he comes out into the open in all his sneaky glory... My educated guess is that Wormtail II is a candidate par excellence for Occam's Razor: entities are not to be multiplied beyond necessity. Renee From R.Vink2 at chello.nl Mon Nov 22 21:59:08 2004 From: R.Vink2 at chello.nl (Renee) Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 21:59:08 -0000 Subject: Two Wormtails was Re: Plot in OotP (wand confusion) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118347 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "pippin_999" wrote: > > The theory is that Voldemort used the code name Wormtail for > his spy Lupin in Voldemort War One, in order to taunt James > and mislead Dumbledore. It is doubtful that any of Voldemort's > agents, including Snape, knew who this "Wormtail" really was. > If Snape was quite sure that it couldn't have been the > real Wormtail (Peter), it would explain why he refused to listen in > PoA. Renee: I wrote in my previous post that you didn't answer Nora's question why Lupin would be Wormtail, but now I see that you did while I was writing my comment. Even so, I don't quite understand the argument, because if James had known there was a spy called *Wormtail*, would he even have taken the slightest risk to make Peter his Secret Keeper? And for the taunt to work, James must have known. Renee From jlnbtr at yahoo.com Mon Nov 22 21:35:23 2004 From: jlnbtr at yahoo.com (Juli) Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 13:35:23 -0800 (PST) Subject: Hermione & Parents In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041122213523.72745.qmail@web53106.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 118348 I was driving to work and a thought came to my mind, how does Hermione goes to The Burrow and other magical places? At Christmas in OoP Hermione arrives at 12 GP by the Night Bus, that we know, we also know that on CoS she gets to Diagon Alley with her muggle parents in muggle transport I guess. But do her parents drive her to the Burrow every summer? Or is her fireplace connected to the Floo Network? Or a port-key (but made by whom?). I laugh at loud thinking of it: her very normal parents at the Burrow, Arthur showing them his muggles artifacts collection, they must think hes crazy (just like Molly does). Thinking about that, why do her parents let her spend every summer at the Weasleys and even school holidays, dont they like her? I bet they do, but then, dont they miss her? And does she miss them? Correct me if Im wrong but not once has she sent an owl to her parents, at least as far as we know. And what do they talk about during the few weeks a year shes at home? She tells them all about her adventures with Ron and Harry? Or like Dean Thomas she tells strictly the necessary? I know JKR has told us (on her website I think) that we wont see a lot more of her family, cause there really isnt much there, I mean they are just like you and me, regular muggles who get up every morning go to work as dentists, then come home, watch the TV news and go to bed. Boring (just like my life) Juli whos still waiting for her Hogwarts letter to arrive From jlnbtr at yahoo.com Mon Nov 22 22:02:55 2004 From: jlnbtr at yahoo.com (jlnbtr) Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 22:02:55 -0000 Subject: Harry and Snape in HBP (Re: Harry mastering his emotions in HPB) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118349 Juli (earlier): > ....it's just the two of them realizing they'll never be close or anything, just that they are on the same side and working together may bring something good. Potioncat: > This reminds me of Professor McGonagall, who doesn't think very much of divination or of Professor Trelawney, but when Trelawney is attacked by Umbridge, McGonagall is there to comfort her. Juli now: That's exactly what I was thinking about, they don't like each other, share points of vue, but when the moment comes they can stick together and support each other. As much as I would like Harry and Severus to become friends, I don't see it happening their wounds are much to deep. Juli From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Mon Nov 22 22:20:01 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 22:20:01 -0000 Subject: The resolution of Snape (was Re: Harry mastering his emotions in In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118350 Naama wrote: > > For me, it's almost a given that Snape will die. This has been > quoted many times: > > > > Q: There's an important kind of redemptive pattern to Snape > > A: He, um, there's so much I wish I could say to you, and I can't > because it would ruin. I > > promise you, whoever asked that question, can I just say to you > that I'm slightly stunned > > that you've said that and you'll find out why I'm so stunned if > you read Book 7. That's all > > I'm going to say. (found in www.quick-quote-quill.org, from a 1999 > interview). > > > > Not that she's explicitly saying, "he's going to sacrifice himself > to save Harry's life"... for me, though, it's as good as. > > > > Hannah: That's an interesting interrpretation. I really, really hope > you're right, because I'd rather have dead!good!Snape than living! > evil!Snape. As a Snape fan, I felt sick when I first read this > quote. I'd been fervently hoping up till then that Snape would turn > out to be a good guy in the end, and maybe even end up getting on ok > with Harry. I'd undergone mental contortions to excuse his > behaviour up till now. > > But this, and a couple of other quotes, have left me thinking that, > much as I would like to see redeemed Snape, it's not going to > happen. I think JKR is trying to tell us that Snape isn't going to > be reformed, isn't going to turn out good. I've never seen it as > meaning he'll sacrifice himself for Harry, I've always thought of it > as meaning he'll turn out bad in the end. To me, Snape giving his > life for Harry's would be completion of the very 'redemptive > pattern' that JKR seems to be debunking when she says this. But you > give me new hope! Carol responds: Funny. I didn't think JKR was "debunking" the redemption theory. I thought she was confirming it, and I took comfort from that quote. To me it indicates that the fan was right, that there *is* a redemptive pattern to Snape, and that JKR was "stunned" that the fan figured it out, after all her efforts to make the readers doubt Snape's loyalty to the Order and his motives regarding Harry. First, the quote clearly indicates that Snape will survive HBP, and second it indicates that she has something big planned for him for Book 7, a scene that will determine once and for all which side he's on. I see it as suggesting that Snape will finally succeed in saving Harry, a feat he's been attempting since Book I only to be thwarted every time. I don't think that he will necessarily die in the attempt; he'll simply (IMO) make it possible for Harry to fight (and win) his final battle with Voldemort. I trust JKR to pull it off credibly without having Snape slip out of character. At least that's what I'm hoping for. Granted, a good dead Snape is better than an evil Snape (dead or alive), but a good live Snape is best of all, at least to me. One thing I don't doubt: The questions that Harry asks near the end of GoF regarding Snape (Where did he go the night Voldemort returned? Why does Dumbledore trust him? etc.) will eventually be answered. And Ron's question about Snape's "first chance" will, I hope, be answered as well.) Another small point for those who believe, as I do, that Snape is the one that Voldemort believes has left him forever: Voldemort states, with unjustified confidence in his prediction, "He will be killed, of course." But he also believes that he's about to kill Harry. Voldemort is not a seer, and his plans gang oft aglay. I don't think we need to believe that Snape will die. In fact, Voldemort's prediction actually reduces the chances for his death, IMHO. Somewhere, at a convention for which the Internet record is long lost, JKR indicated that yes, Snape was the one who had left LV forever, and when the Snapefans present expressed their dismay, she countered with something like, "You don't need to worry about Snape. He can take care of himself." And so he can, or at least he has done it so far. Carol, who has no doubt that Dumbledore has excellent reasons for his confidence in Snape and hopes that Snape will survive Book 7 with his courage, his loyalty, and his sarcasm intact From foxmoth at qnet.com Mon Nov 22 22:24:55 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 22:24:55 -0000 Subject: Two Wormtails was Re: Plot in OotP (wand confusion) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118351 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Renee" wrote: > > Even so, I don't quite understand the argument, because if James had known there was a spy called *Wormtail*, would he even have taken the slightest risk to make Peter his Secret Keeper? And for the taunt to work, James must have known. < Pippin: A good point, but we've been told explicitly, in OOP, that Voldemort's taunts don't always work. Harry's visions of the Department of Mysteries were supposed to taunt him into going after the prophecy, but Dumbledore hadn't told him about it, contrary to Voldemort's assumptions. The same sort of thing could have happened here. Voldemort assumed that the name "Wormtail" would get back to James, but Dumbledore kept it to himself. Pippin From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Mon Nov 22 22:33:12 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 22:33:12 -0000 Subject: Harry at the Dursleys In-Reply-To: <004701c4d0dc$7423c3e0$0402a8c0@carolina.rr.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118352 > Kethryn now - snip. Therefore, while I do question the > Dursley's and, to some extent, Snape's behavoir, I also take it with a grain > of salt because I do remember blowing things completely out of porportion. > Cleaning up after dinner was an ugly battle royal and I can definatly > remember thinking that I would rather die than clean the bathroom on more > than one occasion. > > So anyway, my thoughts on the matter. Alla: If we were only to hear Harry's thoughts, than sure it could be possible to think that he is blowing things out of proportion, but we also see Dursleys' ACTIONS and Snape's actions, so I don't think he is blowing it out of proportion much. Cleaning after dinner - sure, it is a necessary chore, but how about trying to escape Petunia's frying pan? Do you think it is also a normal routine? How about him at the age 14 still remembering how hungry he was last summer, when he was sending food to Sirius? Of course, some exaggeration is there, but I don't think that a lot, From stbjohn2 at yahoo.com Mon Nov 22 22:33:56 2004 From: stbjohn2 at yahoo.com (stbjohn2) Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 22:33:56 -0000 Subject: Hermione & Parents In-Reply-To: <20041122213523.72745.qmail@web53106.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118353 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Juli wrote: > > > Thinking about that, why do her parents let her spend > every summer at the Weasley's and even school > holidays, don't they like her? I bet they do, but > then, don't they miss her? And does she miss them? > Correct me if I'm wrong but not once has she sent an > owl to her parents, at least as far as we know. > > And what do they talk about during the few weeks a > year she's at home? She tells them all about her > adventures with Ron and Harry? Or like Dean Thomas she > tells strictly the necessary? Sandy: Well, she does send them an owl in OOP to let them know she's been made a prefect. She says something to Harry about "at least it's something they'll understand," which does make you wonder how much they know or don't know. Somehow, I think she tells them more than Dean Thomas, but there's no canon for that besides the fact that we know they've been to Diagon Alley. (Maybe it's just advancing age on my part, but I feel kind of sorry for the Grangers, losing their only child not only to growing up, but to a completely different world that they probably can't share much of, at the same time.) From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Mon Nov 22 22:48:30 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 22:48:30 -0000 Subject: Harry and Snape in HBP (Re: Harry mastering his emotions in HPB) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118354 Juli now: That's exactly what I was thinking about, they don't like each other, share points of vue, but when the moment comes they can stick together and support each other. As much as I would like Harry and Severus to become friends, I don't see it happening their wounds are much to deep. Alla: Oh, as much as I would like Harry and Snape to become some kind of friends, preferebly non-fuzzy, I will take what I can get. If they manage to stick together and support each other, I will be one happy camper, but as of now I am not sure if they'll manage to do even that From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Mon Nov 22 22:51:27 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 22:51:27 -0000 Subject: The length of the Pensieve Scene In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118355 Alla wrote: > > > Yes, Remus and Sirius did not tell Harry. It is just as frustrating > as Harry not asking questions about his parents, but Rowling has to > have some surprises up her sleeve yet. She knocked James from his > Saint!Pedestal. In the next books it will be Snape turn, me thinks. > Carol responds: It's a bit hard to knock someone off a pedestal who isn't on one. Harry hates Snape and thinks Snape hates him. He blames him (at least for the moment) for Sirius's death and he allowed himself to accept Ron's and Sirius's theories that Snape was using Occlumency to harm him ("soften him up for Voldemort," etc.). If anything, Snape from Harry's perspective is worse than Snape viewed objectively. I'm not saying that we won't learn bad things about Snape's past--more likely what he did as a Death Eater than anything he did in school. But there's no pedestal to be thrown down. If we're going to be surprised about Snape, it's likely to be in the other direction. Maybe his deeds as a DE (and why he joined in the first place) will be revealed in HBP and the reasons why DD (rightly?) trusts him (and why he left the DEs) will be revealed in Book 7. Or so I hope! Carol From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Mon Nov 22 23:01:35 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 23:01:35 -0000 Subject: The length of the Pensieve Scene In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118356 > Carol responds: > It's a bit hard to knock someone off a pedestal who isn't on one. > Harry hates Snape and thinks Snape hates him. . Alla: I disagree in a sense, Carol. Of course Harry hates Snape, but reader now views him as a sympathetic figure, as victim (in comparison to Marauders) That is what I mean by being thrown of the pedestal. Carol: He blames him (at least > for the moment) for Sirius's death and he allowed himself to accept > Ron's and Sirius's theories that Snape was using Occlumency to harm > him ("soften him up for Voldemort," etc.). If anything, Snape from > Harry's perspective is worse than Snape viewed objectively. Alla: I don't want to go into blame for Sirius' death right now, but Harry did feel worse after the lessons, so he has an objective reason to believe that Snape was trying to harm him. Carol: > I'm not saying that we won't learn bad things about Snape's past-- more likely what he did as a Death Eater than anything he did in school.But there's no pedestal to be thrown down. If we're going to be surprised about Snape, it's likely to be in the other direction. Alla: Again, disagree in a sense. I believe that we are about to learn BAD things about Snape BEFORE we learn good things about him. Let's say for example in HBP Rowling will play with us again, by making us believe that Snape betrayed the Order and then we will learn that such thing never happened. From R.Vink2 at chello.nl Mon Nov 22 23:25:59 2004 From: R.Vink2 at chello.nl (Renee) Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 23:25:59 -0000 Subject: Two Wormtails was Re: Plot in OotP (wand confusion) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118357 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "pippin_999" wrote: > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Renee" > wrote: > > > > > Even so, I don't quite understand the argument, because if > James had known there was a spy called *Wormtail*, would he > even have taken the slightest risk to make Peter his Secret > Keeper? And for the taunt to work, James must have known. < > > Pippin: > A good point, but we've been told explicitly, in OOP, that > Voldemort's taunts don't always work. Harry's visions of the > Department of Mysteries were supposed to taunt him into going > after the prophecy, but Dumbledore hadn't told him about it, > contrary to Voldemort's assumptions. > > The same sort of thing could have happened here. Voldemort > assumed that the name "Wormtail" would get back to James, but > Dumbledore kept it to himself. > Renee: Yes, that was the missing piece of information. But I'm afraid it doesn't sound very convincing to me. Dumbledore knows the spy is someone close to the Potters, yet it never occurs to him to mention the name Wormtail to James, just in case? He doesn't even mention it when James declines his offer to become Secret Keeper? I'm sorry, but I just can't believe Dumbledore would pull this much of a Lupin on the Potters. It's not a case of keeping information behind to avoid telling someone a harsh fact, like not mentioning the Prophecy to Harry. You have the code name of a spy, you know the small group in which to seek him, three lives are at stake and you are a Legilimens, so you just sit back? Also, you find out, years afterwards, that James *did* know someone nicknamed Wormtail. You wonder why Voldemort has used Snape to pass this name on to you and reach the conclusion it was a ruse (and perhaps a taunt). So, the rat animagus Wormtail wasn't the real spy, and therefore it must have been Sirius after all... or Lupin. You are still a Legilimens, but instead of subjecting both of them to your scrutiny you let your first suspect fly away on a Hippogryff and your second suspect walk out of Hogwarts with a Grindylow tank under his arm? This means you're either a complete idiot or a cruel and capricious deity playing with the lives and fates of your creatures. Either way, I don't think you're JKR's Dumbledore. Renee From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Mon Nov 22 23:30:20 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 23:30:20 -0000 Subject: Eagle owl wasRe: SNAPE the coward? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118358 Vivamus wrote: > > Good thought about the particular owl having a charm allowing it > to find LV; that hadn't occurred to me at all. > > > > On Lucius, though, I must be missing something. Why do you say he > did not know then that LV was back? > Potioncat responded: > I had thought that the Eagle owl was Malfoy's and that Malfoy was > helping LV througout GoF. But the conversation in the Graveyard > indicates that it is the first contact Lucius has had with LV. And > given Crouch's feelings toward the DEs who went free, I don't think > Lucius knew about him. So it doesn't make sense that his owl was > being used. Unless of course, Crouch Jr was using that owl for a > particular reason, without Lucius' knowledge. Carol notes: Doesn't canon specifically refer to the eagle owl as Draco's, not the family's? Evidently he keeps it at school and Lucius wouldn't have access to it unless Draco sent a letter to his parents--not very likely unless it was a request for sweets from Narcissa. Crouch!Moody probably chooses that owl because it's distinctive and LV will recognize it instantly. Maybe he (or LV) doesn't want the school owls to know where LV is. (?) At any rate, I don't think that Lucius had anything to do with sending the owl, and I don't think he knew what LV, Wormtail, and Crouch!Moody were up to. Even so, I suspect his remark in the graveyard about not knowing that LV was back is disingenuous. He must have suspected, as Snape and Karkaroff did, that LV's strength was increasing because his Dark Mark was becoming more and more visible. Carol From hickengruendler at yahoo.de Mon Nov 22 23:38:13 2004 From: hickengruendler at yahoo.de (hickengruendler) Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 23:38:13 -0000 Subject: The resolution of Snape (was Re: Harry mastering his emotions in In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118359 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" wrote: > > > Carol responds: > Funny. I didn't think JKR was "debunking" the redemption theory. I > thought she was confirming it, and I took comfort from that quote. To > me it indicates that the fan was right, that there *is* a redemptive > pattern to Snape, and that JKR was "stunned" that the fan figured it > out, after all her efforts to make the readers doubt Snape's loyalty > to the Order and his motives regarding Harry. > Hickengruendler: I agree, and want to add, that we shouldn't forget, when JKR said this. It's from this interview: http://www.quick-quote- quill.org/articles/1999/1099-connectiontransc.html It's from 1999, shortly after the release of PoA, and therefore after we saw Snape from his (so far) worst side. At this point, when JKR was asked this question, we were left with a Snape who was that bitter about Sirius' deeds, that he even enjoyed the possibility of Sirius being kissed by a werewolf. On the other hand, we didn't know anything about his activities as a spy or that he's a member of the Order. The positive scenes with Snape (like when he saved Harry in Book 1 or showed concern for Ginny in book 2) were very few. I would think at this point JKR had every right to be surprised that someone thinks Snape might redeem himself, although I also think he ultimately will, but not before the end of book 7. Hickengruendler From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Mon Nov 22 23:55:02 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 23:55:02 -0000 Subject: Legilimency (Was: Unfortunate!Peter) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118360 Sharon (azriona) wrote: > And while you may argue that being an accomplished Leglimens, Voldy > would of course *know* what Peter was thinking...well, being an > accomplished Leglimens, wouldn't Voldy also attempt to *alter* what > Peter is thinking as well? Perhaps Voldy telling Peter how hated he > is isn't so much reinforcing what Peter already beleives as it is > trying to convince Peter of the opposite. Carol responds: First, my apologies for snipping your interesting comments on Peter's possible motivations. I recommend that anyone interested in the topic go back upthread and answer Sharon's original post. I just want to comment on the Legilimency aspect. Many people seem to think that Legilimency equals mind-reading. But Snape tells Harry that a Legilimens can't read another person's mind as if it were a book. In fact, he apparently doesn't see *thoughts* at all, only memories in the form of moving pictures. There doesn't seem to be any accompanying sound, unlike the memories inside a Pensieve, which are fully fleshed out, with at least three of the five senses present. So the Legilimens sees whatever images/memories are uppermost in the mind of the person facing him. He also feels or senses the person's emotions, or perhaps infers the emotions from the memories or projected consequences imagined by the person whose mind is being invaded. He doesn't "read" or hear the person's thoughts expressed in words. Voldy might see a mental image of Godric's Hollow, for example, but unless he was familiar with the place already, he wouldn't know that the place was Godric's Hollow. Nor, IMO, could he plant images in Peter's mind. That is not a normal part of Legilimency. It's possible only because of the special connection between Harry and Voldy created by the scar. Carol, again apologizing for the extensive snipping and noting that the unsnipped post on Peter can be found by going upthread From nkafkafi at yahoo.com Mon Nov 22 23:56:09 2004 From: nkafkafi at yahoo.com (nkafkafi) Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 23:56:09 -0000 Subject: Two Wormtails was Re: Plot in OotP (wand confusion) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118361 > Pippin: > > Yikes! Of course she picks which chat questions she'll answer. > Otherwise anybody could have sent a message to ten thousand > screens asking her how it feels to be leading thousands of > innocent children into the arms of Satan, or some such > nonsense. Neri: If she picks the chat questions she answers, wouldn't it be easier to simply ignore this question, rather than invent a backstory that never appeared or hinted in canon only to justify the lie? > Pippin: > > The theory is that Voldemort used the code name Wormtail for > his spy Lupin in Voldemort War One, in order to taunt James > and mislead Dumbledore Neri: A nice story, but still, you suggest this solution without a riddle. Nowhere in the book the mystery is presented (or even hinted, IIRC) who Wormtail really is. You only raised this possibility to address JKR's answer in a chat, and this answer actually denies that there's a mystery at all (Q: did Wormtail killed Cedric? A: Correct!). So why would JKR create the double!Wormtail backstory without even presenting it to the reader? If the reader doesn't know that there's mystery at all, he/she would never try solving it, so what would be the point? IOW, you created a solution in order to explain how JKR meant the opposite of what she said in a chat, and then you created a mystery in order to justify this solution. But both the mystery AND its solution don't exist anywhere in canon! I think this is some kind of a record, but I'm not sure of what exactly ;-) Neri From nienna_anwamane at ntlworld.com Mon Nov 22 22:27:33 2004 From: nienna_anwamane at ntlworld.com (nienna_anwamane) Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 22:27:33 -0000 Subject: Hermione & Parents References: <20041122213523.72745.qmail@web53106.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <00ae01c4d0e2$79ca3da0$e14dfea9@talyn> No: HPFGUIDX 118362 Juli wrote: > why do her parents let her spend every summer > at the Weasleys' and even school holidays, don't they > like her? don't they miss her? And does she > miss them? > > And what do they talk about during the few weeks a > year she's at home? I know JKR has told us > that we won't see a lot more of her family, cause > there really isn't much there, regular muggles who > get up every morning go to work as dentists . But it would be nice to at least know their names. I don't think Hermione tells her parents a lot. I can't remember if it's OOP or GOF where she makes the remark about prefects being something they would understand; it must be OOP. Which makes it sound like they can't really get her life at Hogwarts, but to be fair they are pretty much excluded from it. I don't understand why her parents let her spend most of her summer, all of Christmas and whatever other holidays Hogwarts have (they have to have more than those two right?) in the ww world. But it does seem that they are trying to spend time with their daughter but she's so in love with being a witch the muggle world is mundane in comparison. "nienna_anwamane" From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Tue Nov 23 00:18:16 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2004 00:18:16 -0000 Subject: Prophecies and fate; writing what you don't believe (was:The Second Prophecy In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118363 vmonte wrote: > > I don't believe in the prophecy either. I also think that the > prophecy seems to have thrown Dumbledore off his game. Dumbledore > always seems to know a lot more than he should, except for the > prophecy. I'm still inclined to think that Trelawny is a fraud. > Doesn't the prophecy call Voldemort The Dark Lord--sounds like > something a DE would utter. > > Is it possible that someone else is manipulating Trelawny? We've > already seen curses/spells that can manipulate wizards into doing > many things, why wouldn't someone use her for their own purposes. > Carol responds: I agree that the Prophecy is ambiguous and that DD *may* be wrong in reading it to mean that Harry has to kill or be killed. (Admittedly, I *want* him to be wrong here.) However, the Prophecy does seem to be legitimate in that, like the Oracle of Delphi, Trelawney is speaking ambiguous words that are not her own and that she can't remember when the trance has passed. Like the ancient Greeks, historical and mythical, who tried to thwart the oracles, Voldemort tried to kill "the one with the power" but succeeded only in bringing about at least part of the Prophecy ("marked him as his equal"). As for the reference to "the Dark Lord," that's only the typically obscure and ominous language of Prophecies, in which, to my knowledge, actual names are seldom or never used. In any case, Lord Voldemort is not really Voldemort's name. Clearly Voldemort himself didn't plant the Prophecy or he wouldn't be so anxious to know what it said, and it makes no sense for one of his agents to plant it either, even if such a thing could be done. IOW, I think it's a real Prophecy, but the people it concerns will bring it about through their own actions and (limited) choices at some unspecified future time. I don't think the outcome of the final conflict is predetermined, but the conflict itself must take place or LV will be unstoppable. As for whose voice is speaking through Trelawney, that, for me, is the great mystery. It can't be Apollo, as it (supposedly) was for the Oracle at Delphi, since the WW is not the ancient Greek world. Some being or spirit which knows part but not all of the future? Did the Druids have prophecies, and if so, who or what did they believe was speaking to them? Carol, doing her best to reconcile the prophecy with JKR's (and DD's) belief in choice rather than fate From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Tue Nov 23 00:44:27 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2004 00:44:27 -0000 Subject: Unfortunate!Peter In-Reply-To: <20041121184803.91466.qmail@web53102.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118364 Kneasy wrote: > > Add to this the fact that at the Shrieking Shack it took two wizards wielding two wands simultaneously to switch him back to human form and I begin to suspect that Peter has been spelled. He might not even be in animagus form at all, he could have been transfigured. > > > Magda responded: > Entertaining post, Kneasy. I just take issue with this one point. > Remus and Sirius don't de-animagus Peter together because it takes > two wizards to overcome the spell but rather as a sign of their > renewed friendship. "Together?" "I think so..." > > Sirius certainly didn't assume that he needed another person to help > him because he hadn't made any arrangements for another wizard to be > there. And the decision for both to do it happened very late in the > proceedings. Carol notes: FWIW, he didn't even have a wand to begin with, so he couldn't have turned Peter back into a man before him, nor would he have had any reason to, since he didn't expect to have witnesses. He was prepared to dispatch Scabbers with a twelve-inch knife--and presumably take the consequences. (Wonder if dead!Scabbers would have been magically transformed into a bloody human corpse. Ugh.) I'm not sure how this relates to the idea that it takes both Lupin and Black to transform Scabbers into Pettigrew. I rather thank that Magda is right that Lupin was merely showing his loyalty to Sirius by performing the spell along with him, just as he did when they were going to kill Pettigrew together. (I still can't reconcile that idea of loyalty and friendship being more important than the consequences of their actions with what we think we know of Lupin's character, but that's an old thread that I don't have time to go back to now.) Carol, who has no doubt that Pettigrew is a real animagus and the traitor who revealed the names of the old Order members to the DEs, who "picked them off one by one" From dontask2much at yahoo.com Tue Nov 23 01:08:22 2004 From: dontask2much at yahoo.com (charme) Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 20:08:22 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Two Wormtails was Re: Plot in OotP (wand confusion) References: Message-ID: <010201c4d0f8$ee40afa0$6701a8c0@MITRE.ORG> No: HPFGUIDX 118365 >> Pippin: >> >> The theory is that Voldemort used the code name Wormtail for >> his spy Lupin in Voldemort War One, in order to taunt James >> and mislead Dumbledore charme: In my free time this summer reading JKR interviews, she did say that she got Peter's "Wormtail" name from her sister: she said her sister hated rats and it was their tails which freaked her out - I'll see if I can't hunt that article down for you. I also might mention that Sirius refers directly to Peter as "Wormtail" in the Pensieve scene of OoP. With those points in mind, I don't believe Wormtail stands for anything other than Peter. >>Pettigrew appears unmasked before the assembled Death >>Eaters -- why, if not to convince everyone beyond a shadow of >>doubt that Wormtail the spy, the person Sirius overheard the >>DE's in Azkaban denounce as their betrayer, was indeed >>Pettigrew? charme: As far as Pettigrew appearing unmasked, the guy has just given his hand to bring LV back. I think that at this point, Peter has redeemed what other DE's could perceive as "betrayal" when LV was otherwise relieved of his body when attacking Harry and his parents at GH. Sirius does say in PoA that DE's there whispered that Peter had betrayed LV, and they might have wanted to provide some revenge to Peter on that front. Therefore, Peter'd need to be seen by the other DE's so they'd know he's LV's right hand man and responsible for LV's rise (sorry about the pun.) He is rewarded in front of other DE's, so his place in the LV regime is rather solidified now, isn't it? > Everything we see of Pettigrew puts him in the first category, but > everything that we're told about the spy puts him in the second > (or the third). The spy was supposedly Voldemort's second in > command and he was active for an entire year. Yet Peter's > health collapsed before Sirius or Crookshanks ever got near > him. How could he possibly have served two masters, one of > them in a position of great authority, for such a long time, > without ever showing the strain? His animagus form would be a > chameleon! charme: I re-read the first couple of chapters of PoA as a result of your post because I was curious if I missed something. about Scabber's health and Egypt timeline. Siruis' escape is reported, I think, before Ron returned from Egypt with Scabbers. Ron specifically says in PoA at the shop where they take Scabbers to be examined that he hasn't been right since they *returned* from Egypt. Scabbers started showing wear and tear when he returned to find out Sirius had escaped, probably paranoid Sirius would hunt him down. >>Moreover, if what Fudge tells us is true, and Black's exposure as >>a double agent seemed to have been timed for the moment of >>the Potters' deaths, then the frame was planned in advance. The >>purpose of that would be so that the real spy could continue >>spying. The war would not have come to an end with Harry's >>death. There was still another prophecy child and Albus >>Dumbledore to deal with. It makes sense that Voldemort would >>try to preserve his spy by framing someone else. >> But Voldemort could hardly be sure that Sirius would not >>maintain his innocence and denounce Pettigrew as the secret >>keeper. That would make Pettigrew's position impossible, >>especially if his success depended on his being completely >>unsuspected. And if Pettigrew was supposed to fake his death >>to avoid this, he still wouldn't have been able to continue spying, >>so what was the point of framing Sirius? None -- unless >>Pettigrew was not the spy! charme: I think you give LV too much credit for preplanning; I think as we've seen in some of Kneasy's posts, LV isn't exactly as on top of things as we would assume a villian to be. As far as Lupin being the "spy", I don't believe he is. Since the Secret Keeper's identity was a "switch" and a secret, it was Sirius' word against Peter's after GH. DD makes a statement in in OoP about LV expecting how "fools who love" act, and I don't think this is any different with Sirius and his love for James and Lily. He *thought* he'd killed them (PoA) by convincing them to change Secret Keepers at the last minute. Guilt can do funky things to people, and he's just thought he's caused the deaths of 2 of the people in the world he cared most about. More people knew Sirius was most likely their SK; there's no one after James & Lily died to corroborate Sirius' story that it was switched to Peter. When Sirius went after Peter, Peter who is not known for his dueling, could only do one thing: "hide" It's not like he had anyone to protect him (LV) anymore. And I disagree that Peter couldn't still yet "spy", he could. He's a rat in his animagus form - as long as Lupin didn't see him (the only one free or alive at this point,) he was ok. From heos at virgilio.it Tue Nov 23 00:34:06 2004 From: heos at virgilio.it (chrusotoxos) Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2004 00:34:06 -0000 Subject: Does SNAPE hate himself? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118366 Hi and sorry to rant about Snape again, but he really is one of the most intriguing characters of the series... I was just wondering about something I read I don't know where, a post saying that, after all, Snape wasn't self-disgusted at all and that he liked his life a lot, thank you very much. I was unsettled by this view, because I always took for granted that Snape hated himself in a way or the other - I mean, if he betrayed it was because he didn't like his life (if he hasn't joined Voldemort just to spy, of course). But maybe it's true that he was disgusted with himself back then, and since he has recovered. What do you think? Is he so bitter because he hates himself or he just doesn't like to teach, and students are more stupid every year and so on? This could be important, because if he really hates his life he'll be more than ready to sacrifice himself if the need arises to - to give his unworthy life to ensure Harry's victory...whereas if he likes himself, the plot could be different... Please enlighten me!! From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Tue Nov 23 01:11:21 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2004 01:11:21 -0000 Subject: The length of the Pensieve Scene In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118367 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "dumbledore11214" wrote: > > > Pippin: > > > > So, if Sirius sank to Snape's level, that makes it better > > somehow? I don't think so. Maybe Sirius never used Dark Arts > > (though using a werewolf as the tool of revenge is certainly dark > > enough for me) but that just makes him like Crouch Sr, justifying > > his ruthless measures by the ruthlessness of others. Not a > > pretty picture. > > > Alla: > > NO, Pippin, it does not make him better. It is just makes the > picture more complete, because I just don't see Snape as innocent > angel in his schoolyears. I just think that we will find out more > about why James and Sirius hated him so, I just don't think that we > know everything yet, that is all. > > Although if Sirius never used Dark Arts, I can certainly see him > hating someone who did, even if such hatred is absolutely misplaced. Carol adds: Here's a thought (Do what you want with it; it's just something that occurred to me and I have no emotional or intellectual stake in the argument). Setting aside Sirius, whose motives are, I think, more personal and more vindictive than James's, maybe James liked to hex Severus because Severus was the closest thing James had to a worthy opponent in terms of the number of curses he knew. Of course, James also disliked Severus, the greasy little Slytherin oddball, and no doubt enjoyed trying to make him angry. But possibly he also regarded hexing him as a challenge precisely because he was a skilled opponent (much as a champion chess player would rather play against another champion than against an opponent he can easily defeat). If Severus had been a helpless little wimp like Peter (or James's perception of Peter), there'd have been no fun in hexing him. As it was, taking on an opponent who not only could but did fight back (except when unfairly caught off guard and attacked by two boys at once), James could show off and gain the admiration of other Gryffindors (and anyone else who disliked the skinny, studious little Slytherin "because he exist[ed]"). Quite possibly their confrontations were so frequent that both instinctively pointed their wands the second they saw the other--at least after Severus's older Slytherin cronies had left Hogwarts. Just a thought. Carol, who wants to know what happened just before, during, and after the so-called Prank but doesn't think that any great secrets will be revealed regarding earlier confrontations From willsonkmom at msn.com Tue Nov 23 01:52:54 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2004 01:52:54 -0000 Subject: Eagle owl wasRe: SNAPE the coward? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118368 Carol wrote: > At any rate, I don't think that Lucius had anything to do with sending > the owl, and I don't think he knew what LV, Wormtail, and Crouch! Moody > were up to. Even so, I suspect his remark in the graveyard about not > knowing that LV was back is disingenuous. He must have suspected, as > Snape and Karkaroff did, that LV's strength was increasing because his > Dark Mark was becoming more and more visible. > Potioncat: When I read the book earlier, I thought the Eagle Owl was a clue that Malfoy was involved. But it doesn't look like he was. If the owl was Draco's owl or the family owl, I don't think any Malfoy knew it was being used to send mail to LV. Given that Crouch!Moody was no friend of the Malfoys, it would seem odd for him to use the Malfoy owl. I'm sure Lucius and most of the DEs knew something was up, but I think only Barty Crouch Jr and Pettigrew knew that LV was fully back. So the question is, was it indeed Malfoy's owl? Can anyone just use any owl? Yes, I know Crouch!Moody wouldn't mind breaking rules, but it would seem odd if anyone saw him using Malfoy's owl. So are there two different Eagle Owls at Hogswarts? Does anyone have a SS/PS handy? Are we told what kind of owl came with an urgent request for Dumbledore just before Quirrell went for the stone? From jlnbtr at yahoo.com Tue Nov 23 00:35:38 2004 From: jlnbtr at yahoo.com (Juli) Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 16:35:38 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups]Re: Harry and Snape in HBP (Re: Harry mastering his emotions in HPB) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041123003538.56746.qmail@web53105.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 118369 > Juli now: > share points of vue, but when the moment comes they > can stick > together and support each other. > > Alla: > Oh, as much as I would like Harry and Snape to > become some kind of > friends, preferebly non-fuzzy, I will take what I > can get. If they > manage to stick together and support each other, I > will be one happy > camper, but as of now I am not sure if they'll > manage to do even that > > Juli again: They HAVE to, I mean they must, JKR is kinda teaching us a lesson to overcome our feeling to become better persons. Yeah I know it's not a 'moral' book or anything, but I think it still has some teachings. Besides in Harry's quest to become a better person this could be a nice obstacule. Juli __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? The all-new My Yahoo! - Get yours free! http://my.yahoo.com From jlnbtr at yahoo.com Tue Nov 23 00:52:03 2004 From: jlnbtr at yahoo.com (Juli) Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 16:52:03 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Hermione & Parents In-Reply-To: <00ae01c4d0e2$79ca3da0$e14dfea9@talyn> Message-ID: <20041123005203.76347.qmail@web53104.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 118370 nienna_anwamane wrote: > > I don't think Hermione tells her parents a lot. I > can't remember if it's OOP > or GOF where she makes the remark about prefects > being something they would > understand; it must be OOP. Which makes it sound > like they can't really get > her life at Hogwarts, but to be fair they are pretty > much excluded from it. > I don't understand why her parents let her spend > most of her summer, all of > Christmas and whatever other holidays Hogwarts have > (they have to have more > than those two right?) in the ww world. But it does > seem that they are > trying to spend time with their daughter but she's > so in love with being a > witch the muggle world is mundane in comparison. > Juli: I feel sorry for them, they lost their daughter when she was only 11, sure she goes home a few weeks during the summer but as soon as she can, she goes to the Burrow. Hermione should at least try to spend some time with them instead of spending every single minute with Ron and Harry. I mean Christmas!!! I've only spent one Christmas without my family and it was very hard, now 5 christmases in a row, I couldn't. She should get to an agreement: Easter at Hogwarts and Christmas at home. Juli __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Meet the all-new My Yahoo! - Try it today! http://my.yahoo.com From stevejjen at earthlink.net Tue Nov 23 01:58:10 2004 From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese) Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2004 01:58:10 -0000 Subject: Is Petunia older or younger than Lily? In-Reply-To: <8c20328104112204292615bef4@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118371 Rissa: > Is Petunia older or younger than Lily? Jen: I was curious about your question and looked on the Lexicon and in PS/SS, but couldn't find a definitive answer. I've always imagined Petunia to be older. Since Lily married right after leaving Hogwarts and had Harry approximately a year later (according to Lexicon), that would leave a younger Petunia still finishing school. So if Petunia *is* younger, she left school to marry and have Dudley. She just doesn't seem the type to be impulsive that way. Rissa: > Or she might have been older and everyone's favourite, and then Lily > marries James, who is from an old family, has money, and even in term > of the muggle world that has a certain cachet. Vernon is a salesman, > and doesn't have any of the style or grace of the impression of James. > This is supported by their belittling of James and Lily's place in the > world - It makes Petunia feel herself more; less of a small person, > though it only creates her one. Jen: I do hope we hear more about Petunia's resentment of Lily. Was it simply Lily's magical ability and admission to Hogwarts that caused the rift? That's what Petunia seems to be saying in SS, when she gives Harry her big speech after Hagrid's arrival. Makes you wonder if they were close before that, or were always too different to get along. Lily may have been a handful to live with if she started showing magical ability at an early age! And then Petunia sees the same powers in Harry. That may be all the explanation there is. Jen Reese From jferer at yahoo.com Tue Nov 23 02:32:06 2004 From: jferer at yahoo.com (Jim Ferer) Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2004 02:32:06 -0000 Subject: Does SNAPE hate himself? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118372 Chrusotoxos: "I was just wondering about something I read I don't know where, a post saying that, after all, Snape wasn't self-disgusted at all and that he liked his life a lot, thank you very much. I was unsettled by this view, because I always took for granted that Snape hated himself in a way or the other - I mean, if he betrayed it was because he didn't like his life (if he hasn't joined Voldemort just to spy, of course). But maybe it's true that he was disgusted with himself back then, and since he has recovered." He hasn't recovered, and you were right. The idea that Snape likes his life is, in my opinion, preposterous. People who like their lives are not filled with the rage Snape is. Children who grow up cowering in their homes while their parents fight are not happy. Kids who are outcasts at school, who are tormented and rejected and in lash out in turn (cause and effect wrapped up in one) are not content. Snape hasn't changed. He is filled with rage at others as well. He was ostracized as a kid, and paradoxically did everything he could to earn it. That didn't change his anger. I doubt he ever got love for himself - the idea that he secretly had a crush on Lily makes sense and may help explain the depth of his hatred for James. Everything we observe about Snape shouts out his torment. Snape, happy? No way. Jim Ferer From snow15145 at yahoo.com Tue Nov 23 02:57:50 2004 From: snow15145 at yahoo.com (snow15145) Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2004 02:57:50 -0000 Subject: Plot in OotP (wand confusion) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118373 Renee snipped: To make the existence of a Wormtail II plausible, you'll have to come up with an argument, preferably canon-based, why this person would have exactly the same nickname as Peter Pettigrew the Rat Animagus (unless Wormtail is a common surname in Britain, of course.) If you think it's Lupin, you have to answer Nora's direct question, which I notice you don't do anywhere in your comment. Snow: You bring up a valid point to explore, Renee, about the surname Wormtail that may actually help in Pippin's double Pettigrew scenario although I realize you are not quite in favor of this theory. Who gave the marauders their individual nicknames, i.e. did each person choose their own nickname or did one of the marauders suggest an appropriate nickname? The reason this may be relevant is Lupin's last name. It has been questioned in the past of the coincidence between the fact that he was bitten as a child and becomes a werewolf every month and the reference to his last name that implies werewolf traits; was he born with the Lupin surname? If Lupin's last name was originally Wormtail but was changed to Lupin without any of his friend's knowledge, Lupin may have suggested that Pettigrew's animagus nickname be Wormtail. This suggestion may not be cannon based but it does have just enough of a loophole for consideration. It seems to be the lack of previous information (non canon based) that becomes the relevance later on i.e. Barty Crouch being named after his father. No one questioned what his first name was until you looked back on it for reflective evidence to support whether there had been an adequate clue. Renee: Just arguing that Peter couldn't have AK-ed Cedric doesn't work. I see no reason why it would be impossible: as someone pointed out before it's perfectly possible to carry a baby-sized Voldie in the crook of one elbow, and it doesn't take a great deal of dexterity to pull out a wand with your opposite hand, if only the wand is in the right place to begin with. And why wouldn't it be? It seems only logical that Pettigrew would have a wand at hand, under the circumstances. Snow: I don't think it is just a question of how heavy or awkward the bundle is to hold with a wand at the ready but more so the suspicious circumstances surrounding this particular instance. Harry and Cedric are 6 feet from where this cloaked person stops next to a marble headstone when, conveniently for the scene, Harry's scar attacks him to the point of blindness so Harry nor the readers see who it is that attacked Cedric for certain. The next reference, although we know that the cloaked figure holding the bundle had been but six feet in front of them, Harry now hears a high cold voice coming from `far away' above his head. Next Harry hears a swishing noise and a second voice not directly identified as the voice of Wormtail, but we have learned to assume it to be, saying the AK spell. Harry resumes his sight to find Cedric's dead body next to him and the cloaked figure pulling him towards `the' marble headstone that had been spoken of previous as to where the cloaked figure had stopped. Harry was tied to the marble headstone by the cloaked figure, that he now realizes is Pettigrew, and could not see anything that is directly in front of him. Harry has a limited view of the whole picture throughout and as he is the narrator of the scene has therefore blindfolded the reader along with him. When these artful tactics occur, I personally tend to be very suspicious. Snow From snow15145 at yahoo.com Tue Nov 23 03:17:00 2004 From: snow15145 at yahoo.com (snow15145) Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2004 03:17:00 -0000 Subject: Is Petunia older or younger than Lily? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118374 Jen snipped: I do hope we hear more about Petunia's resentment of Lily. Was it simply Lily's magical ability and admission to Hogwarts that caused the rift? That's what Petunia seems to be saying in SS, when she gives Harry her big speech after Hagrid's arrival. Makes you wonder if they were close before that, or were always too different to get along. Lily may have been a handful to live with if she started showing magical ability at an early age! And then Petunia sees the same powers in Harry. That may be all the explanation there is. Snow: I am more apt to go with the first child syndrome, the children that don't like sharing their parent's affection and sees this affection toward their younger sibling as dislike towards themselves. Petunia, although she rants about the magical ability of her sister, seems to be more resentful of her parent's appreciation for Lily but blames her magic ability as the cause of this adoration. This could also be a very good reasoning as to why she purposely spoils Dudley. Petunia would want to assure Dudley that he is much more important than Harry and need not feel the way that she had been made to feel in her own mind. This would be yet another syndrome; I'm not going to be like my mother. From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Tue Nov 23 03:23:49 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2004 03:23:49 -0000 Subject: The Pensieve (again) (Was: Unfortunate!Peter) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118375 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Sharon" wrote: > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" > wrote: > > Carol responds: > > A few quick points: 1) If the Pensieve distorted memories > > subjectively in favor of the person whose memories they are, Snape > > would have had no reason to hide this memory from Harry. Clearly, > > he found it humiliating, in no way favorable to himself even though to us (and to Harry), he appears to be an innocent victim. > > But Snape does have a reason to hide this memory from Harry, > regardless of whether or not it's been distorted - it was humiliating to him, and he didn't want Harry to find it. Period. It wasn't because he didn't want Harry to see how horrible James & Sirius were as kids; it was because Snape didn't want Harry to see the extend of the humiliation towards himself. Carol again: True. You're missing my point, I think. I'm saying that the memory hasn't been distorted to fit Snape's subjective view. If it were favorable to him, he'd have no reason to hide it. It *does* reveal that he's the innocent victim, but that, in his mind, does not compensate for the humiliation that it also reveals, so he doesn't want Harry to see. We agree on that. It's only your view that the memory *subjectively favors Snape* that I disagree with. As I've argued in many other posts, the Pensieve memories are almost certainly objective records of what really happened, over and above what the person whose memory it is actually observed or consciously remembers. Those memories certainly can be distorted by a person's preconceptions or predilections, which is why the Pensieve is such a useful tool for someone like Dumbledore; it removes the memory from that subjective context. (Snape is using the Pensieve for a different purpose, but that doesn't make the memories he removed any less objective than Dumbledore's memories of the trials.) But I covered those arguments in the post you're responding to, so I won't repeat them here. Carol From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Tue Nov 23 03:47:51 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2004 03:47:51 -0000 Subject: June 2005 Release for HBP? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118376 Inkling wrote: > > Mugglenet.com quotes "someone in a position to know" as saying Scholastic plans to releae HBP in June 2005 with possible target dates June 11 and June 18. See mugglenet for more details. Sherry asked: > > > > Can you post a link to that? i've been on muggle net but can't > find it. Thanks. Inkling responded: > > That may be because it was posted on Friday and has moved down the > scroll of news items on the home page and gotten a bit buried > amongst the other items. if you go back to www.mugglenet.com and scroll down to Friday's new items, you will find it. > > I was excited to read it on mugglenet because they are usually > pretty responsible and reliable about these rumors. If they say > it's someone who should know, I take it seriously! The linked > editorial is also encouraging. Carol adds: Here are the links. The first article, as Inkling said, is far down the page: http://www.mugglenet.com/ http://www.mugglenet.com/editorials/editorials/edit-alex01.shtml Carol, who thinks the summer 2005 dates are overly optimistic but could be wrong! From khinterberg at yahoo.com Tue Nov 23 03:51:09 2004 From: khinterberg at yahoo.com (khinterberg) Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2004 03:51:09 -0000 Subject: Purely evil Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118377 This quote has interested me for some time now. Q. Tom Houseman asked, "Do you think that anyone in real life is truly wholly evil like Draco Malfoy and Voldemort?" A. Rowling said, "My instinct is to say that probably not, but I can t answer that question without ruining the series for you." Rowling said that in future books she will attempt to show "why Voldemort is who he is." The Star-Ledger, Newark, NJ 16 October 1999 Is she telling us that neither Voldemort nor Draco are completely evil? I like to think so, because it would make the plot and character development so interesting. I'm not a fan of black and white goodness and evil, and I like to think of this quote as showing us, the fans, that Jo doesn't either, even for her "evil" characters. khinterberg From khinterberg at yahoo.com Tue Nov 23 03:53:26 2004 From: khinterberg at yahoo.com (khinterberg) Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2004 03:53:26 -0000 Subject: Does SNAPE hate himself? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118378 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Jim Ferer" wrote: > > Chrusotoxos: "I was just wondering about something I read I don't know > where, a post saying that, after all, Snape wasn't self-disgusted at > all and that he liked his life a lot, thank you very much. > > I was unsettled by this view, because I always took for granted that > Snape hated himself in a way or the other - I mean, if he betrayed it > was because he didn't like his life (if he hasn't joined Voldemort > just to spy, of course). But maybe it's true that he was disgusted > with himself back then, and since he has recovered." > > He hasn't recovered, and you were right. The idea that Snape likes > his life is, in my opinion, preposterous. > > People who like their lives are not filled with the rage Snape is. > Children who grow up cowering in their homes while their parents fight > are not happy. Kids who are outcasts at school, who are tormented and > rejected and in lash out in turn (cause and effect wrapped up in one) > are not content. Snape hasn't changed. > > He is filled with rage at others as well. He was ostracized as a kid, > and paradoxically did everything he could to earn it. That didn't > change his anger. I doubt he ever got love for himself - the idea that > he secretly had a crush on Lily makes sense and may help explain the > depth of his hatred for James. Everything we observe about Snape > shouts out his torment. > > Snape, happy? No way. > > Jim Ferer I also remember reading once (if someone can find this it would be wonderful) an interview with Alan Rickman. We know Jo has given him background info on the character, more than she has given other people, and he was saying how Snape is a very insecure person. khinterberg From khinterberg at yahoo.com Tue Nov 23 04:02:54 2004 From: khinterberg at yahoo.com (khinterberg) Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2004 04:02:54 -0000 Subject: Does SNAPE hate himself? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118379 > > I also remember reading once (if someone can find this it would be > wonderful) an interview with Alan Rickman. We know Jo has given him > background info on the character, more than she has given other > people, and he was saying how Snape is a very insecure person. > > khinterberg I found the quote I was looking for. Q: Can you tell us a little about your character Professor Snape? A: Well he's Professor of Potions and the current head of Slytherin House at Hogwarts - the school of wizardry that Harry attends, but he harbours a secret ambition to be a Professor of the Dark Arts. He isn't that taken with Harry though, probably because he finds him a little too popular for a first year pupil I suppose. I think at heart Snape is basically quite an insecure person, he's always longing to be something else that people will really respect like a black magician not just a school master. That's why he envies the more popular and successful boys like Harry. He does have his positive side though even though Harry's a thorn in his side he doesn't let it worry him too much. http://www.unreel.co.uk/features/featurealanrickman.cfm khinterberg From bob.oliver at cox.net Tue Nov 23 03:27:11 2004 From: bob.oliver at cox.net (lupinlore) Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2004 03:27:11 -0000 Subject: Harry at the Dursleys In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118380 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "pippin_999" wrote: > > James instructed Lily to "Take Harry and go! It's him! Go! Run! I'll > hold him off." Clearly he had some means of escape in mind. > But Harry was in his cot when Lily died (per the website), so she > wasn't fleeing the house with him when she died. Knowing that > Voldemort would never stop hunting Harry, she chose to give up > her life, and the love and the home she could have made for > him, in order to give him the blood protection. Since this is > ancient magic, it is something she could have known about. > Dumbledore understood what she had done, and honored her > sacrifice by taking Harry to live with the Dursleys. > Well, IMO, and it is of course my opinion, a much more plausible explanation is that Voldemort swept through James while Lily was paralyzed with fear and before she could act on James' warning. Thinking all that through in the few moments between James' warning and Voldemort entering the room would be quite a trick. But, we shall see. I may be completely wrong. It wouldn't exactly be the first instance in recorded history. Lupinlore From bob.oliver at cox.net Tue Nov 23 03:57:37 2004 From: bob.oliver at cox.net (lupinlore) Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2004 03:57:37 -0000 Subject: Harry abused by Dursleys / Re: Harry at the Dursleys In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118381 Alla wrote: > If we were only to hear Harry's thoughts, then sure it could > be possible to think that he is blowing things out of proportion, > but we also see Dursleys' ACTIONS and Snape's actions, so I don't > think he is blowing it out of proportion much. > > Cleaning after dinner - sure, it is a necessary chore, but how > about trying to escape Petunia's frying pan? Do you think it is > also a normal routine? > > How about him at the age 14 still remembering how hungry he was > last summer, when he was sending food to Sirius? > > Of course, some exaggeration is there, but I don't think that a lot, I agree with Alla on this. I really don't see how anyone could seriously argue that Harry is not an abused child as that term is commonly understood and that the series is not, therefore, about an abused child. Now, it is possible that JKR did not *mean* to write a series about an abused child. No one has ever put the question to her so bluntly. However, if I recall correctly she did say "I do feel sorry for Dudley. Vernon and Petunia have, in a way, abused him as badly as they've abused Harry." I may be wrong, however. Whatever JKR *meant* I think there is plentiful evidence *in the text* that Harry is indeed a victim of child abuse. And I think there is plentiful evidence that he is exhibiting symptoms of that abuse. I don't think we are warranted in dismissing that because of what JKR's intentions may or may not be -- at least not at this juncture. Lupinlore From bob.oliver at cox.net Tue Nov 23 04:09:30 2004 From: bob.oliver at cox.net (lupinlore) Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2004 04:09:30 -0000 Subject: Too "Good" Harry / The resolution of Snape In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118382 SSSusan wrote: > As for Harry's turning the other cheek being just too healthy & > well-adjusted...hasn't Harry seemed overall a bit this already? > Parents murdered, left with his abusive relatives, yet somehow > knows how to choose the good & noble path? You know? So...what > if he turned the other cheek but gritted his teeth while doing it > and still vented to his friends? Would that make it more > palatable? :-) > > Siriusly Snapey Susan, who thinks Harry *is* remarkably healthy & > noble. I agree, Susan, that Harry is remarkably healthy and noble, indeed already too much so to be entirely believable. To add a "martyr" attitude toward Snape would, purely in my opinion, push things into the realm of "completely unbelievable" and "far too much." I suppose I was in the minority in very much enjoying the angry Harry of OOTP. Certainly I felt like it was long overdue. And I thought it much more realistic and enjoyable to read than the almost mystical goodness he had displayed up to this point. I will be very disappointed if JKR lapses back into more unbelievable goodness, even if Harry turning the other cheek would be the "right" thing to do. It's just not human behavior (except I suppose from saints) and not believable. Lupinlore From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Tue Nov 23 04:44:57 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2004 04:44:57 -0000 Subject: Harry abused by Dursleys / Re: Harry at the Dursleys In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118383 Lupinlore: I agree with Alla on this. I really don't see how anyone could seriously argue that Harry is not an abused child as that term is commonly understood and that the series is not, therefore, about an abused child. Now, it is possible that JKR did not *mean* to write a series about an abused child. No one has ever put the question to her so bluntly. However, if I recall correctly she did say "I do feel sorry for Dudley. Vernon and Petunia have, in a way, abused him as badly as they've abused Harry." I may be wrong, however. Whatever JKR *meant* I think there is plentiful evidence *in the text* that Harry is indeed a victim of child abuse. And I think there is plentiful evidence that he is exhibiting symptoms of that abuse. I don't think we are warranted in dismissing that because of what JKR's intentions may or may not be -- at least not at this juncture. Alla: Thank you for your support. :) Yes, indeed. I also don't know whether JKR meant from the beginning to write series about abused child or not. Maybe she fully intended to write a fairy tale about hero, who triumphs over all evil forces, including his evil relatives. But here again we have a question about how much authoritarial intention should matter in interpretation of the books. Whether she meant it or not, she gave us "real" or "kind of real" accidents of the abuse ( not the WORST abuse in the world, but still abuse). Whether she meant it or not - Harry's pain and hurt from what Dursleys do to him IS the attitude of the abused child. I wanted him to blew out earlier than OOP, but again, I take what I can get. "She never loved me" - I'd say it is abused child speaking. Now, I do think that Harry is on his road to recovery, because with every book he is less and less afraid of Dursleys, but I disagree that this means that he was never abused in the first place. I'd say here is where "fairytale" element kicks in or maybe in OOP the fact that adults finally decided to say something. From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Tue Nov 23 04:50:48 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2004 04:50:48 -0000 Subject: Too "Good" Harry / The resolution of Snape In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118384 Lupinlore: I agree, Susan, that Harry is remarkably healthy and noble, indeed already too much so to be entirely believable. To add a "martyr" attitude toward Snape would, purely in my opinion, push things into the realm of "completely unbelievable" and "far too much." I suppose I was in the minority in very much enjoying the angry Harry of OOTP. Certainly I felt like it was long overdue. And I thought it much more realistic and enjoyable to read than the almost mystical goodness he had displayed up to this point. I will be very disappointed if JKR lapses back into more unbelievable goodness, even if Harry turning the other cheek would be the "right" thing to do. It's just not human behavior (except I suppose from saints) and not believable. Alla: Well, you were certainly not alone, enjoying Angry!Harry in OOP. I also felt that it was long overdue. But wouldn't you agree that despite being angry, Harry basically stayed the same person? What I am trying to say is that his "goodness" is still within him, he just temporarily did not display as much of it as he used to? Harry IS expected to defeat Voldemort. How believable is that? What I am trying to say that him trying to work with Snape is no less believable than fifteen year old expecting single handedly kill Voldy. From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Tue Nov 23 04:54:03 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2004 04:54:03 -0000 Subject: CHAPTER DISCUSSION: ch. 32 "Out of the Fire" In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118385 quigonginger wrote: > 4) At the time Harry talked to Kreacher, Sirius is tending Buckbeak, whom Kreacher has injured. Kreacher tells Harry that Sirius has gone out. After Harry specifically asks about the D of M, Kreacher gleefully tells him that Sirius will not return. What do you think Kreacher's role is in the set-up, and how did he know what he would be required to do? Carol responds: I find this scene to be one of the most confusing in OoP (which is saying quite a bit). It's unclear to me how Kreacher knew it was time to injure Buckbeak, or for that matter, how LV knew it was time to tell him so. The planted vision occurs the next day. How did LV know it would succeed? How did he communicate with Kreacher? Clearly he didn't do so directly; it must have been via Narcissa, who then told Lucius, who in turn communicated to LV, but surely Kreacher wasn't routinely using the kitchen fireplace for conversations with his dead mistress's niece. And how did Kreacher know that Sirius wouldn't come back from the DoM? He wasn't even really there at the time. Was this Kreacher's own little contribution to Harry's psychological torment, or had Kreacher been told to say it? To answer your last question directly, I think Kreacher is a more-than-willing accomplice or tool and that he's delighted to be of service to Narcissa and her "master" (LV)--Lucius would be a mere go-between in his view--but I have no clear idea how he knew what to do or when to do it. (I still think that he may have ironed his hands in advance for betraying "Master," but everyone else seems to think that Buckbeak injured him. If so, why his hands and not his face or naked chest?) A sidenote on Narcissa: We're informed by Dobby as early as CoS that the family who owns him are "bad Dark wizards." IOW, he puts Narcissa, and perhaps even twelve-year-old Draco, in the same category as Lucius. A true scion of the Black family, that Narcissa. > 6) What do you think of Snape's actions? He managed to warn Harry > that she had used veritaserum on him once, which should have put > Harry on his guard. He played up to Umbridge without being any help > whatsoever. (And got in some delightfully snarky comments as well.) > He saved Neville from choking with another snarky comment to Crabbe. > Do you think he could have given Harry a clue that he understood > him? Or would that have been too risky as Umbrigde had just seen > through him enough to put him on probation? Carol: This is one of my favorite Snape scenes in the entire series, made even better by DD's remark in a later chapter that the veritaserum Snape supplied to Umbridge was fake. For me, besides the inimitable snarkiness that makes Snape such a delightful character (when he's not in a towering rage or doing something grossly unfair), there's the obvious opposition to Umbridge and the fact that he manages to do a good deed for Neville under cover of advice to Crabbe. I think you're right that he understood Harry's message despite never having heard Sirius referred to as Padfoot and that the Babbling Beverage comment was a clever, in-character way of feigning incomprehension. But as you say, he was already on probation, and a nod or other signal would have been foolish under the circumstances. I agree with most other posters that he did the best he could under the circumstances--better than could have been expected, really. And I agree with Vivamus that Harry may have put Snape's life at risk by speaking to him directly about Padfoot--not that I expect Umbridge to come back into the story, but Draco and the other Slytherins might get ideas, especially since Draco seems to know about Sirius Black being an animagus and an Order member. It won't matter that Black is now dead, only that Snape and Harry were communicating about him. Altogether, I expect Snape to have his hands full next book. Fortunately for us Snapefans, we know he'll survive to Book 7! Carol From foxmoth at qnet.com Tue Nov 23 04:58:05 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2004 04:58:05 -0000 Subject: Two Wormtails was Re: Plot in OotP (wand confusion) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118386 > > Pippin: > > > > The theory is that Voldemort used the code name Wormtail for his spy Lupin in Voldemort War One, in order to taunt James and mislead Dumbledore > > Neri: > > A nice story, but still, you suggest this solution without a riddle. Nowhere in the book the mystery is presented (or even hinted, IIRC) who Wormtail really is.< Pippin: Erm, of course there's a mystery about who Wormtail really is. ---- "You don't think it more likely he got it *directly from the manufacturers*?" [emphasis JKR's]. Harry didn't understand what Snape was talking about. Nor, apparently, did Lupin. "You mean, by Mr. Wormtail or one of these people?" he said. --PoA ch 14 Wormtail is identified later in the book when Lupin tells about the Animagi. But the mystery which is not solved, and has been asked many times on this list, is "What did Snape know about the 'manufacturers' that made him question Lupin?" If the names and their meanings were common knowledge, then there's no reason for Snape to be so oblique -- he can just say, "It seems Harry has come by one of your old school things. I'd like an explanation, Lupin, if you'd be so kind." If the names aren't common knowledge, then what does Snape know, and how does he know it? I theorized, long before OOP came out, in fact I think it was before my first ESE!Lupin post, that Snape had heard the name Wormtail as a DE, and thought it was Sirius. The pensieve scene in OOP is no help, by the way, since we can't tell how much of the Marauder conversation was actually audible to Snape. Harry has to move away from Snape to hear it. Renee: >Yes, that was the missing piece of information. But I'm afraid it doesn't sound very convincing to me. Dumbledore knows the spy is someone close to the Potters, yet it never occurs to him to mention the name Wormtail to James, just in case? He doesn't even mention it when James declines his offer to become Secret Keeper? < Pippin: Dumbledore would have been extremely careful about sharing information with James if he believed James was trusting the wrong people. Dumbledore suspected Sirius, but James trusted Sirius and suspected Lupin. Either of them could have used the name Wormtail. Nobody suspected Pettigrew, name or no name. Pippin From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Tue Nov 23 05:11:16 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2004 05:11:16 -0000 Subject: Two Wormtails was Re: Plot in OotP (wand confusion) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118387 > Pippin: snip. Wormtail is identified later in the book when Lupin tells about the Animagi. But the mystery which is not solved, and has been asked many times on this list, is "What did Snape know about the 'manufacturers' that made him question Lupin?" If the names and their meanings were common knowledge, then there's no reason for Snape to be so oblique -- he can just say, "It seems Harry has come by one of your old school things. I'd like an explanation, Lupin, if you'd be so kind." Alla: Forgive me for coming back to the plot-based reasons, but NO, not for a second I would think that Snape could say something like that in the middle of the book. The fact that Snape knew Marauders was meant to be revealed at the end of the book and it was, IMO. If Snape said something like what you suggested, the answers would have been given too early in the book. The reader is not supposed to know yet that Snape and Marauders are somehow connected, I think. From nrenka at yahoo.com Tue Nov 23 05:14:42 2004 From: nrenka at yahoo.com (nrenka) Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2004 05:14:42 -0000 Subject: Two Wormtails was Re: Plot in OotP (wand confusion) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118388 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "pippin_999" wrote: > Pippin: > > Erm, of course there's a mystery about who Wormtail really is. > ---- > "You don't think it more likely he got it *directly from the > manufacturers*?" [emphasis JKR's]. > > Harry didn't understand what Snape was talking about. Nor, > apparently, did Lupin. Then why his comments about the Map afterwards that clearly reveal that Lupin knows exactly what the Map is? > "You mean, by Mr. Wormtail or one of these people?" he said. > --PoA ch 14 > > Wormtail is identified later in the book when Lupin tells about > the Animagi. But the mystery which is not solved, and has been > asked many times on this list, is "What did Snape know about > the 'manufacturers' that made him question Lupin?" > > If the names and their meanings were common knowledge, then > there's no reason for Snape to be so oblique -- he can just say, > "It seems Harry has come by one of your old school things. I'd > like an explanation, Lupin, if you'd be so kind." Funny, I always read that scene the other way. Lupin knows *exactly* what Snape is referring to--and his indications in confiscating the Map, his statements about how the makers would have thought it funny to lure Harry out of school--he knows what the Map is, because he helped make it. However, Snape and Lupin have one thing in common here--no one wants to talk about the schooldays. Snape has absolutely zero interest in bringing up his schooldays in front of Harry (a point reinforced in OotP). So he brings up his suspicions in an oblique way (there was a lovely explication of what might have been the 'actual' conversation going on posted here ages ago, but I've lost track of it) to avoid being asked or having to ask a direct question. He's obliquely accusing Lupin of providing the contraband item, which, after all, is directly insulting Snape himself, and Lupin is responding in a way that removes the item from Harry, gets it back in his own possession, and also avoids answering questions. Nobody wants to be forthcoming about the past, both from character reasons and the overarching Deity of Plot. But it's fairly clear that both Snape and Lupin have *some* idea of what's going on there. > The pensieve scene in OOP is no help, by the way, since we > can't tell how much of the Marauder conversation was actually > audible to Snape. Harry has to move away from Snape to hear it. That Pensieve scene bothers me so much, just because it causes all kinds of problems that Harry can hear things that Snape couldn't have possibly. I guess we have to go with 'It's magic!', or else I suspect it would be more common for people to pull out memories and go back to listen to things they couldn't have heard. This is a purely practical objection--the mechanics of the thing are cursedly unclear. -Nora notes that she does not have books with her, and would appreciate some filled-in (as in, non-selectively excerpted :) canon for Lupin's reactions to the Map From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Tue Nov 23 05:38:30 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2004 05:38:30 -0000 Subject: Harry at the Dursleys In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118389 Alla wrote: > > If we were only to hear Harry's thoughts, than sure it could be > possible to think that he is blowing things out of proportion, but we also see Dursleys' ACTIONS and Snape's actions, so I don't think he > is blowing it out of proportion much. > > Cleaning after dinner - sure, it is a necessary chore, but how about > trying to escape Petunia's frying pan? Do you think it is also a > normal routine? > > How about him at the age 14 still remembering how hungry he was last > summer, when he was sending food to Sirius? Carol notes: A samall point here. Harry isn't remembering when he was left in his room and being fed cold soup through the door slot; he's remembering when the whole family--Vernon and Petunia included--went on Dudley's grapefruit diet. That wasn't abuse, exactly. It was Petunia's idea of helping Dudley accept his deprivation by having others share his misery. Carol, noting for the hundredth time (in response to Kethryn's snipped comment) that Harry isn't the narrator though we do see the action from his perspective From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Tue Nov 23 05:48:30 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2004 05:48:30 -0000 Subject: Harry at the Dursleys In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118390 > Carol notes: > A small point here. Harry isn't remembering when he was left in hisroom and being fed cold soup through the door slot; he's remembering when the whole family--Vernon and Petunia included--went on Dudley's grapefruit diet. That wasn't abuse, exactly. It was Petunia's idea of helping Dudley accept his deprivation by having others share his misery. Alla: I think it is understandable that he remembers the incident (or the whole summer being hungry), which happened last summer, not what happened two years ago, even though I doubt that he completely forgot it. And I don't know, Harry did not need this diet, I think it could be called abuse. but it is JMO, of course. From khinterberg at yahoo.com Tue Nov 23 05:57:28 2004 From: khinterberg at yahoo.com (khinterberg) Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2004 05:57:28 -0000 Subject: Two Wormtails was Re: Plot in OotP (wand confusion) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118391 > > -Nora notes that she does not have books with her, and would > appreciate some filled-in (as in, non-selectively excerpted :) canon > for Lupin's reactions to the Map "Lupin!" Snape called into the fire. "I want a word!" Utterly bewildered, Harry stared at the fire. A large shape had appeared in it, revolving very fast. Seconds later, Professor Lupin was clambering out of the fireplace, brushing ash off his shabby robes. "You called, Severus?" said Lupin mildly. "I certainly did," said Snape, his face contorted with fury as he strode back to his desk. "I have just asked Potter to empty his pockets. He was carrying this." Snape pointed at the parchment, on which the words of Messrs. Moony, Wormtail, Padfoot, and Prongs were still shining. An odd, closed expression appeared on Lupin's face. "Well?" said Snape. Lupin continued to stare at the map. Harry had the impression that Lupin was doing some very quick thinking. "*Well*?" said Snape again. "This parchment is plainly full of Dark Magic. This is supposed to be your area of expertise, Lupin. Where do you imagine Potter got such a thing?" Lupin looked up and, by the merest half-glance in Harry's direction, warned him not to interrupt. "Full of Dark Magic?" he repeated mildly. "Do you really think so, Severus? It looks to me as though it is merely a piece of parchment that insults anybody who reads it. Childish, but surely not dangerous? I imagine Harry got it from a joke shop--" "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*?" Harry didn't understand what Snape was talking about. Nor, apparently, did Lupin. "You mean, by Mr. Wormtail or one of these people?" he said. "Harry, do you know any of these men?" "No," said Harry quickly. "You see, Severus?" said Lupin, turning back to Snape. "It looks like a Zonko product to me--" Right on cue, Ron came bursting into the office. He was completely out of breath, and stopped just short of Snape's desk, clutching the stitch in his chest and trying to speak. "I--gave--Harry--that--stuff," he choked. "Bought--it...in Zonko's...ages--ago..." "Well!" said Lupion, clapping his hands together and looking around cheerfully. "That seems to clear that up! Severus, I'll take this back, shall I?" He folded the map and tucked it inside his robes. "Harry, Ron, come with me, I need a word about my vampire essay--excuse us, Severus--" Harry didn't dare look at Snape as they left his office. He, Ron, and Lupin walked all the way back into the entrance hall before speaking. Then Harry turned to Lupin. "Professor, I--" "I don't want to hear explanations," said Lupin shortly. He glanced around the empty entrance hall and lowered his voice. "I happen to know that this map was confiscated by Mr. Filch many years ago. Yes, I know it's a map," he said as Harry and Ron looked amazed. "I don't want to know how it fell into your possession. I am, however, *astounded* that you didn't hand it in. Particularly after what happened the last time a student left information about the castle lying around. And I can't let you have it back, Harry." Harry had expected that, and was too keen for explanations to protest. "Why did Snape think I'd got it from the manufacturers?" "Because...," Lupin hesitated,"because these mapmakers would have wanted to lure you out of school. They'd think it extremely entertaining." "Do you *know* them?" said Harry, impressed. "We've met," he said shortly. He was looking at Harry more seriously than ever before. "Don't expect me to cover up for you again, 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 effect 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." Let me just comment that this is one of my favorite, but also one of the most confusing bits of canon there is. It gives rise to several questions and obserations for me. I still can't fully understand the "directly from the manufacturers" interchange, and don't know if I really will if I haven't got it fully by now. Also, I do love how Remus says "I'll take this back, shall I?" That "back" should have set off warning bells. But it surprises me how easily Snape lets one of the said manufacturers have it back, although that could be due simply to there being students around, and we wouldn't want them to get too suspicious. Also though, I wonder why Lupin was so surprised that Harry did not want to turn the map in straightaway. Lupin was a teenager who helped write this map, he surely knows how it feels to be young boy getting into mischief? Harry has never been too concerned with a threat over his own life, at thirteen years old I don't think keeping the map would have bothered him at all. However, I think Lupin might be putting many of his frustrations and mixed emotions about the past into this speech. I have always loved that last paragraph, with Lupin reminding Harry of his parents, I think it's beautiful coming from a once-friend of someone to their son, perhaps also with the frustration that he couldn't protect James from death, but perhaps he can help protect Harry. I simply love it. khinterberg, who feels sorry for whoever really types up novels, it is a long and bothersome process From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Tue Nov 23 06:10:23 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2004 06:10:23 -0000 Subject: Plot in OotP (wand confusion) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118392 Snow wrote: > I don't think it is just a question of how heavy or awkward the > bundle is to hold with a wand at the ready but more so the suspicious circumstances surrounding this particular instance. Harry and Cedric > are 6 feet from where this cloaked person stops next to a marble > headstone when, conveniently for the scene, Harry's scar attacks him > to the point of blindness so Harry nor the readers see who it is that > attacked Cedric for certain. The next reference, although we know > that the cloaked figure holding the bundle had been but six feet in > front of them, Harry now hears a high cold voice coming from `far > away' above his head. Next Harry hears a swishing noise and a second > voice not directly identified as the voice of Wormtail, but we have > learned to assume it to be, saying the AK spell. Harry resumes his > sight to find Cedric's dead body next to him and the cloaked figure > pulling him towards `the' marble headstone that had been spoken of > previous as to where the cloaked figure had stopped. Harry was tied > to the marble headstone by the cloaked figure, that he now realizes > is Pettigrew, and could not see anything that is directly in front of him. Harry has a limited view of the whole picture throughout and as > he is the narrator of the scene has therefore blindfolded the reader > along with him. When these artful tactics occur, I personally tend to be very suspicious. > > Snow Carol notes: I didn't snip your second paragraph as I hate it when my own ideas are lost through oversnipping, but I'm really only responding to the last sentence. As I said just now in another post and have explained in great detail elsewhere, Harry is not the narrator. This series is not a first-person narrative but a third-person narrative with a limited omniscient and not always reliable narrator who sees (usually) from Harry's perspective. If the narrator were Harry, he would use "I," not "he." You are certainly right, however, that Harry's perspective, though voiced by the third-person narrator rather than by Harry himself, limits our knowledge and occasionally distorts it. I think in this instance it's because JKR doesn't want Harry to actually see Cedric die and she wants him to associate the death with Voldemort (through the pain in his scar) rather than with Wormtail. I still don't buy the argument for two Wormtails (or any other conspiracy theory), but I certainly question the reliability of the narrator at many points. Carol, with apologies for harping on a point that she considers important and hoping that she isn't boring people who would rather talk about two Wormtails From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Tue Nov 23 06:25:10 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2004 06:25:10 -0000 Subject: Harry at the Dursleys In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118393 Pippin wrote: > > > > James instructed Lily to "Take Harry and go! It's him! Go! Run! > I'll hold him off." Clearly he had some means of escape in mind. > > But Harry was in his cot when Lily died (per the website), so she > > wasn't fleeing the house with him when she died. Knowing that > > Voldemort would never stop hunting Harry, she chose to give up > > her life, and the love and the home she could have made for > > him, in order to give him the blood protection. Since this is > > ancient magic, it is something she could have known about. > > Dumbledore understood what she had done, and honored her > > sacrifice by taking Harry to live with the Dursleys. > > > Lupinlore responded: > Well, IMO, and it is of course my opinion, a much more plausible > explanation is that Voldemort swept through James while Lily was > paralyzed with fear and before she could act on James' warning. > Thinking all that through in the few moments between James' warning > and Voldemort entering the room would be quite a trick. Carol notes: There's also the possibility that Lily, who was noted for her skill with Charms, put some sort of protective charm on Harry that could only be activated by her self-sacrifice. That, to me, is the only explanation for her insistence on Voldemort killing her instead of Harry. Self-sacrifice in itself seems insufficient to bring about the ancient magic that both Voldemort and Dumbledore speak of. (I think Dudmbledore may have taught her the Charm as a desperation measure, a fallback in case the Fidelius Charm was insufficient.) If you're interested, you can find a much more elaborate discussion of this idea in back posts. At any rate, I think Lily knew what she was going to do and didn't tell James. There was no thinking it through at the last minute. She was prepared to die saving her child. And she wasn't paralyzed with fear or she wouldn't have blocke Voldemort's way or begged him to kill her, not Harry. She was, in her way, extremely courageous. Carol, wondering if "cot" is British for what we Americans call a crib From Arcum_Dagsson at celticwind.zzn.com Tue Nov 23 06:44:04 2004 From: Arcum_Dagsson at celticwind.zzn.com (Shanoah Alkire) Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2004 06:44:04 -0000 Subject: Two Wormtails was Re: Plot in OotP (wand confusion) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118394 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "khinterberg" wrote: > > > > > > -Nora notes that she does not have books with her, and would > > appreciate some filled-in (as in, non-selectively excerpted :) canon > > for Lupin's reactions to the Map > Off the topic slightly, but two things that attract my attention: > "*Well*?" said Snape again. "This parchment is plainly full of Dark > Magic. This is supposed to be your area of expertise, Lupin. Where > do you imagine Potter got such a thing?" > Lupin looked up and, by the merest half-glance in Harry's direction, > warned him not to interrupt. > "Full of Dark Magic?" he repeated mildly. "Do you really think so, > Severus? It looks to me as though it is merely a piece of parchment > that insults anybody who reads it. Childish, but surely not > dangerous? I imagine Harry got it from a joke shop--" First, note that Snape mentions "Dark Magic", not "Defense Against the Dark Arts" as Lupin's area of expertise. Second, Snape suggests the parchment is "full of Dark Magic", and Lupin evades the question, and never gives a straight answer. Were the dark arts involved in it's creation? And was Lupin the one casting it? --Arcum From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Tue Nov 23 06:55:10 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2004 06:55:10 -0000 Subject: Two Wormtails was Re: Plot in OotP (wand confusion) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118395 Pippin wrote: > > > > Wormtail is identified later in the book when Lupin tells about > the Animagi. But the mystery which is not solved, and has been > asked many times on this list, is "What did Snape know about > the 'manufacturers' that made him question Lupin?" > > If the names and their meanings were common knowledge, then > there's no reason for Snape to be so oblique -- he can just say, > "It seems Harry has come by one of your old school things. I'd > like an explanation, Lupin, if you'd be so kind." > > > Alla responded: > > Forgive me for coming back to the plot-based reasons, but NO, not > for a second I would think that Snape could say something like that > in the middle of the book. The fact that Snape knew Marauders was > meant to be revealed at the end of the book and it was, IMO. If > Snape said something like what you suggested, the answers would have > been given too early in the book. > > The reader is not supposed to know yet that Snape and Marauders are > somehow connected, I think. Carol adds: And neither is Harry. I'm not sure how much Snape knew about MWPP and their nicknames--I'm certain he didn't know that they were animagi--but the scene makes sense only if both he and Lupin know who the makers of the map/parchment are and are keeping that knowledge from Harry. Lupin's "I'll take this *back,* shall I?" also makes sense only in this context. He never had the map in PoA; Snape took it from Harry who got it from the Twins who took it from Filch's cabinet. That line confused me mightily when I first read the book. If Harry were paying closer attention, it would have confused him, too. But Snape lets Lupin take the parchment without a word, recognizing that he is, indeed, one of the "manufacturers." Either he had heard at least one of the names previously or he "put two and two together as only Snape could":(four people, all male, who insulted him--one of them named Moony, which could relate to the full moon. . . . Snape is quick and clever and knows who his enemies are, or were--the parchment is clearly old and could relate to his youth, and the insults are clearly the taunts of teenager, not adults. It wouldn't take too much effort on his part to deduce that Lupin was one of those four students and to infer the identity of the others from his. At any rate, there's more at stake in this scene and many others than the necessity of suppressing information for the plot's sake. The characters, Harry excepted, know more than we do, and we, like Harry, are being given information (and red herrings) piecemeal because it suits the characters' needs and motives as well as JKR's. IMO, it's important if we're going to understand the backstory to determine who knew what and when. In this case, we need to figure out how much Snape knew about MWPP. Granted, we'll disagree among ourselves, but we ought at least to try to figure it out. With luck, we'll find out more in HBP. Until then, the canon is subject to individual interpretation, and "JKR is suppressing information," however true, is not sufficient for me or, I'm guessing, for most of us on this list. Carol, who is actually all but caught up on posting! From gbannister10 at aol.com Tue Nov 23 07:46:06 2004 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2004 07:46:06 -0000 Subject: Plot in OotP (wand confusion) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118396 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Renee" wrote: > Renee: > I don't recall Sirius using Crouch Jr's first name either, but I > don't think it matters, because the analogy is skewed. Sons and > fathers or uncles and nephews do have identical names occasionally; > certain combinations simply run in certain families. And yes, in a > series this size with such large numbers of characters it's only > realistic if a few completely unrelated characters have the same, > fairly common family name. That JKR admitted Mark wasn't surnamed > Evans on purpose doesn't really matter here. Geoff: It was quite common until just a few years ago for the eldest child to carry on a family tradition like this, which can be very confusing. In a family I know very well, the eldest son was, for at least four generations, Walter John, until the fourth put his foot down and refused to go with the flow for the sake of the latest child in the family and he didn't repeat this with his children either. > (unless Wormtail is a common surname in Britain, of > course.) Geoff: Which it isn't. > Renee: > My uneducated guess would be that Wormtail II is really Wormtongue, > magically transported from Middle-earth to the Potterworld. Harry > simply misunderstood his name or stopped listening after *Worm-*, > and JKR put him in to be able to pay homage to J.R.R. Tolkien once > he comes out into the open in all his sneaky glory... Geoff: I love this idea. There is some canon evidence for this. :-)) Wormtongue's real name is Grima. So he is obviously the Grim and he lives at Grima-uld Place. And Dumbledore is a transported Gandalf? There, how's that to back up Renee's new conspiracy theory? Geoff http://www.aspectsofexmoor.com From R.Vink2 at chello.nl Tue Nov 23 10:09:35 2004 From: R.Vink2 at chello.nl (Renee) Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2004 10:09:35 -0000 Subject: Plot in OotP (wand confusion) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118397 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "snow15145" wrote: > > Renee snipped: > > To make the existence of a Wormtail II plausible, you'll have to > come up with an argument, preferably canon-based, why this person > would have exactly the same nickname as Peter Pettigrew the Rat > Animagus (unless Wormtail is a common surname in Britain, of > course.) If you think it's Lupin, you have to answer Nora's direct > question, which I notice you don't do anywhere in your comment. > > Snow: > > You bring up a valid point to explore, Renee, about the surname > Wormtail that may actually help in Pippin's double Pettigrew scenario > although I realize you are not quite in favor of this theory. > > Who gave the marauders their individual nicknames, i.e. did each > person choose their own nickname or did one of the marauders suggest > an appropriate nickname? The reason this may be relevant is Lupin's > last name. It has been questioned in the past of the coincidence > between the fact that he was bitten as a child and becomes a werewolf > every month and the reference to his last name that implies werewolf > traits; was he born with the Lupin surname? If Lupin's last name was > originally Wormtail but was changed to Lupin without any of his > friend's knowledge, Lupin may have suggested that Pettigrew's > animagus nickname be Wormtail. This suggestion may not be cannon > based but it does have just enough of a loophole for consideration. Renee again: You're right in assuming I'm not quite in favour of this theory ;) Actually, the explanation you give here makes it even less believable. I've got two problems with it: 1) Wormtail is a very improbable surname, even in the Wizarding World. 2) Why would Lupin have wanted Peter to have his old surname for a nickname? Are you assuming that 15-year old Remus, far from being immensely grateful because his friends have taken the risk to become animagi for him, is already concocting evil plans to join the future Dark Lord Voldemort, knowing that one day both he and Peter will be in his service, that the Potters will need a Secret Keeper and will decline DD's offer? (If he knows that much about the future, he also knows it didn't work out quite well for Voldemort.) A post-Hogwarts Lupin turning to Voldemort because he was rejected by the Wizarding World makes at least marginal sense (even though I don't think JKR will go that way), but this is just too far-fetched. Renee From R.Vink2 at chello.nl Tue Nov 23 10:13:30 2004 From: R.Vink2 at chello.nl (Renee) Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2004 10:13:30 -0000 Subject: Plot in OotP (wand confusion) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118398 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Geoff Bannister" wrote: > > > > > > > > > (unless Wormtail is a common surname in Britain, of > > course.) > > > Geoff: > Which it isn't. Renee: Thanks for confirming this, I suspected as much. > > > > Renee: > > My uneducated guess would be that Wormtail II is really Wormtongue, > > magically transported from Middle-earth to the Potterworld. Harry > > simply misunderstood his name or stopped listening after *Worm- *, > > and JKR put him in to be able to pay homage to J.R.R. Tolkien once > > he comes out into the open in all his sneaky glory... > > > Geoff: > I love this idea. There is some canon evidence for this. :-)) > > Wormtongue's real name is Grima. So he is obviously the Grim and he > lives at Grima-uld Place. > > And Dumbledore is a transported Gandalf? > > There, how's that to back up Renee's new conspiracy theory? Renee: Thanks again! :) This may just be the inspiration I need to work it out a little better. I bet Grima has learned a lot of wizarding tricks from Saruman. Renee From azriona at juno.com Tue Nov 23 10:21:24 2004 From: azriona at juno.com (Sharon) Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2004 10:21:24 -0000 Subject: Purely evil In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118399 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "khinterberg" wrote: > > This quote has interested me for some time now. > > Q. Tom Houseman asked, "Do you think that anyone in real life is truly > wholly evil like Draco Malfoy and Voldemort?" > > A. Rowling said, "My instinct is to say that probably not, but I can t > answer that question without ruining the series for you." Rowling said > that in future books she will attempt to show "why Voldemort is who he > is." > > The Star-Ledger, Newark, NJ > > 16 October 1999 > > Is she telling us that neither Voldemort nor Draco are completely > evil? I like to think so, because it would make the plot and character > development so interesting. I'm not a fan of black and white goodness > and evil, and I like to think of this quote as showing us, the fans, > that Jo doesn't either, even for her "evil" characters. > > khinterberg I kind of think it could go either way. I mean, if JKR said "Why, yes. There are people in life who are purely evil from Day One and that's that", then you'd have the possibility that Draco or Lucius or Voldy are pure evil. If you had JKR saying "No, no one can be pure evil" then you've got fans who say "Look! There's hope for those three yet!" Either way she answers, she's toast. --azriona From R.Vink2 at chello.nl Tue Nov 23 10:29:19 2004 From: R.Vink2 at chello.nl (Renee) Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2004 10:29:19 -0000 Subject: Two Wormtails was Re: Plot in OotP (wand confusion) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118400 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "pippin_999" wrote: > > >Neri: > > A nice story, but still, you suggest this solution without a riddle. > Nowhere in the book the mystery is presented (or even hinted, > IIRC) who Wormtail really is.< > > Pippin: > > Erm, of course there's a mystery about who Wormtail really is. > ---- > "You don't think it more likely he got it *directly from the > manufacturers*?" [emphasis JKR's]. > > Harry didn't understand what Snape was talking about. Nor, > apparently, did Lupin. > > "You mean, by Mr. Wormtail or one of these people?" he said. > --PoA ch 14 > > Wormtail is identified later in the book when Lupin tells about > the Animagi. But the mystery which is not solved, and has been > asked many times on this list, is "What did Snape know about > the 'manufacturers' that made him question Lupin?" Renee: Who Wormtail is and what exactly Snape knows are two different mysteries. As you say, the first one is solved later in the books. On the later, we can only speculate but it doesn't change the fact that the first one is solved. (Pulling Occam's Razor again.) > Renee: > >Yes, that was the missing piece of information. But I'm afraid it > doesn't sound very convincing to me. Dumbledore knows the spy > is someone close to the Potters, yet it never occurs to him to > mention the name Wormtail to James, just in case? He doesn't > even mention it when James declines his offer to become Secret > Keeper? < > > Pippin: > Dumbledore would have been extremely careful about sharing > information with James if he believed James was trusting the > wrong people. Dumbledore suspected Sirius, but James trusted > Sirius and suspected Lupin. Either of them could have used the > name Wormtail. Nobody suspected Pettigrew, name or no > name. > Renee: ?? I don't see what harm it could do to tell James the spy went under the name Wormtail. So he would have told Sirius. What did DD think Sirius could do with this information? And if DD suspected Sirius *before* Halloween 1981 (is this canon?) he was criminally irresponsible anyway, to allow him to be the Secret Keeper. And are you saying James & Sirius wouldn't have suspected Peter if they'd been confronted with the name Wormtail? Renee From azriona at juno.com Tue Nov 23 10:30:30 2004 From: azriona at juno.com (Sharon) Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2004 10:30:30 -0000 Subject: Is Petunia older or younger than Lily? In-Reply-To: <8c20328104112204292615bef4@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118401 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Amanda Coleman wrote: > Imagine her disappointment if they had been planning what they would > do when Petunia got her letter, and then it never came. > > Disappointed dreams do turn to bitter resentment. > > Or she might have been older and everyone's favourite, and then Lily > marries James, who is from an old family, has money, and even in term > of the muggle world that has a certain cachet. Vernon is a salesman, > and doesn't have any of the style or grace of the impression of James. No, Rissa, I would agree with both the theories. I do think that Petunia is probably a little younger than Lily, although all the signs sure point to her being older. (After all, Petunia's child is a bit older, and Lily was fairly young to begin with when Harry was born, if you go by the 1960-1980 birthdates.) But regardless of whether Petunia was the older or younger sibling, I do think that the two weren't that far apart in age (maybe a year or 18 months max) and that they were fairly close as youngsters. It's not something that's ever been in canon, or asked in any of the interviews with JKR, and you can bet it's at the top of my list should I ever get to ask JKR anything! --azriona From azriona at juno.com Tue Nov 23 10:50:04 2004 From: azriona at juno.com (Sharon) Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2004 10:50:04 -0000 Subject: Is Petunia older or younger than Lily? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118402 Two birds with one stone here, because I am silly and did not make it three. > Jen: Since Lily married right after leaving > Hogwarts and had Harry approximately a year later (according to > Lexicon), that would leave a younger Petunia still finishing school. > So if Petunia *is* younger, she left school to marry and have > Dudley. She just doesn't seem the type to be impulsive that way. > So, according to the Lexicon's timeline, Lily was born in 1959. But she starts Hogwarts in 1971 - which, depending on how you look at it, doesn't make a lot of sense. Shouldn't she be starting in 1970, when she's actually turning 11 years old? (See, this is why I don't entirely trust the timelines on the Lexicon, which is otherwise really good.) But we'll go with that for the moment. So Lily finishes Hogwarts in June 1978. Harry is born two years later, not one, in July 1980. If Petunia is a year younger than Lily, she would not have had to drop out of school in order to have him. (Especially as the timeline says that Dudders was born on June 22 - does anybody know where that came from? - Petunia would have finished school in June 1979, one full year before Dudley would have been born. >Snow: >I am more apt to go with the first child syndrome, the children that don't like sharing their parent's affection and sees this affection toward their younger sibling as dislike towards themselves. Petunia, although she rants about the magical ability of her sister, seems to be more resentful of her parent's appreciation for Lily but blames her magic ability as the cause of this adoration. > Yes, but speaking as the eldest child of my family, I don't feel resentful toward my younger brother in the least. (And both my parents were the youngest of their siblings, and likely would have been more likely to favor him.) My husband, likewise, doesn't feel resentful toward his younger brother either. (And there's a bit of a range of difference - I'm a year and a half older than my brother; my husband is 4 years older than his brother.) Actually, truth be told, my brother was always more resentful of me than the other way around! So I'm inclined to think that Petunia's resentment isn't necessarily indicative that she is the older child - she could easily be any sibling, resenting that her sister has received these things, but she was denied. --azriona From gbannister10 at aol.com Tue Nov 23 11:34:40 2004 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2004 11:34:40 -0000 Subject: Harry at the Dursleys In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118403 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" wrote: Carol, wondering if "cot" is British for what we Americans call a crib Geoff: A cot is normally a child's bed fitted with rails, one set of which slide down to allow access. They are not far short of an ordinary single bed in size and are also used for elderly folk or in hospitals to prevent occupants from falling out. A crib usually describes a small baby's bed, possibly small enough to be carried around with the owners in residence. Geoff http://www.aspectsofexmoor.com Exmoor National Park views, walks and West Somerset Railway steam and diesel views From willsonkmom at msn.com Tue Nov 23 13:20:58 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2004 13:20:58 -0000 Subject: the Map was Two Wormtails was Re: Plot in OotP (wand confusion) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118404 Arcum, > First, note that Snape mentions "Dark Magic", not "Defense Against > the Dark Arts" as Lupin's area of expertise. > > Second, Snape suggests the parchment is "full of Dark Magic", and > Lupin evades the question, and never gives a straight answer. > > Were the dark arts involved in it's creation? And was Lupin the one > casting it? > Potioncat: It's been done several times in the books that DADA is called simply dark arts. But there could be two things going on: the DADA teacher would have to know dark magic to defend against it OR Snape could be getting a dig in that Lupin is a Dark Creature. Saying the map is full of Dark Magic, may just be his way of saying Harry shouldn't have it. (And there are lots of reasons why he shouldn't) And it could be something I've brought up before: is it clear to the members of the WW where the line is between dark magic and allowable magic lies? Snape was disliked by MWPP because he knew lots of Dark Magic, yet the four of them knew a good number of hexes. Our magic is OK, your magic is not? So does Snape think the map is Dark Magic? And if he does, does he think it's acceptable dark magic? I tend to think that it is not dark magic because Harry still has it DD doesn't seem to disapprove and we haven't seen Snape protest it. From finwitch at yahoo.com Tue Nov 23 13:36:40 2004 From: finwitch at yahoo.com (finwitch) Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2004 13:36:40 -0000 Subject: CHAPTER DISCUSSION: ch. 32 "Out of the Fire" In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118405 Ginger: > 1) Do you think that F&G really intended to use what seems to be a > fatal substance for a prank? Or was Ginny lying about that too? Finwitch: I think F&G came up with the idea to /tell/ people about the Gas (which really wasn't there). It could also be an ingredient for their Skiving Snackbox (particularly the Fainting one). > 2) If Ginny continues in this vein, will she be a potential asset to > the group? Will she be good enough to fool LV, for example? Or > another Legilimans? Or will she be a potential liability? Finwitch: Well, as Ginny *could* learn Occlumency, I suppose. Maybe she and Harry *both* can learn it together. I do think Ginny's good asset to DA and Harry in particular. > 3) This is the second time that Ginny is able to cut Harry off mid- > pique. (The first being when she points out that she too knows what > it is like to be possessed.) Does this speak for her character? Or > is it that she is someone outside the trio, so Harry is not as used > to her comments? Or (I'm gonna kick myself for asking this) could it > have shipping implications? Finwitch: What ever it is, Ginny knows how to listen. She DOES come out with information etc. and, of course, Ginny's the one who got F&G to help Harry to talk with Sirius. Remember, growing up with twins made her think that anything's possible if you've got enough nerve. (which, of course, is a Gryff. trait, to have/appreciate the Nerve). > 5) Umbridge says she is going to loosen Harry's tongue with the > Cruciatus curse. She is pointing her wand at Harry. Knowing Harry's > tolerance for the Quill, don't you think she would have gotten the > truth out of him more easily by torturing one of his friends and > making him watch? Or does she not understand love between friends? > Or did she choose to curse Harry in the hopes that one of his weaker > friends would crack to spare Harry the pain? Finwitch: And all she got was - well, a trap! Of course, Harry *has* tolerated Cruciatus before. I wonder, maybe Neville's accidental magic would have knocked Umbridge off if she had cast the curse on Harry? Or Snape had her arrested? Or - well, something? Hard to go on with a what-if, though... > 6) What do you think of Snape's actions? He managed to warn Harry > that she had used veritaserum on him once, which should have put > Harry on his guard. He played up to Umbridge without being any help > whatsoever. (And got in some delightfully snarky comments as well.) > He saved Neville from choking with another snarky comment to Crabbe. > Do you think he could have given Harry a clue that he understood > him? Or would that have been too risky as Umbrigde had just seen > through him enough to put him on probation? Finwitch: Veritaserum... as I recall, Harry merely pretended to drink, thinking of what Moody would say about accepting a drink from a known enemy. As such, Harry already WAS on his guard. (so Snape's fake Veritaserum didn't do much help...) Well, I suppose Snape DID tell some Order member at some point - (while Harry was flying on a Thestral?)... Finwitch From claredurina at yahoo.com Tue Nov 23 13:32:23 2004 From: claredurina at yahoo.com (Clare Durina) Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2004 13:32:23 -0000 Subject: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118406 I sent this message to another group i belong to. Just wanted to see what you make of it here. Back in may, a friend printed for me some postings and articles from the group. I've been trying to find them in the archive, but I can't, so i'm posting this. I have been feeling indignant at the popular characterization of James and Sirius as bullies and the twins as well. Being "cool" does not make one bad, and being enviably attractive or talented does not make one vindicive. I think that they were immature, carried-away boys. And while Sirius does have a mean streak, it just makes him a more complex and convincing character. I'm glad that they are multi-dimensional realistic good- guys instead of flat, flawless angels. Sirius's viciousness is embarrassing to us, because we like him overall and wish he were not so human; and it reminds us of our own flaws and past mistakes. Anyway, a bully picks on someone because he is weak and squashing him makes the bully feel stronger. Severus doesn't fit into that "innocent weak" mold- he was unpopular, but James and Sirius did not single him out for that; he was every bit as antagonistic as they were and his own character flaws were his downfall. Envy, spitefulness, vengeance, etc. If the tables had turned at some point and he had had friends to back him up and James were alone, I believe he would have been much more shamelessly ruthless with that upperhand than JP or SB ever were. After all, even as an adult he definitely sunk lower than Sirius with his disparaging remarks in OOP, just baiting Sirius for a fight. He also abuses his authority as a teacher, not only against James' son, but also with innocent, blundering Neville. Sirius didn't target innocent unpopular kids. The same goes for Fred and George who will justify taking on real bullies, like Motague or Dudley, and putting them in their places, but would only protect Neville. Here is another related point. I cannot agree that Wormtail was a nice guy who went astray due to low self-esteem after years of his cool friends' torment. He was never nice, and just like being strong and talented does not make one offensive, being weak or talentless does not make one innocent. Why should we feel for him? Maybe too many of us adult HP fans were unpopular as kids and are drawing an illogical connection between Pettigrew and themselves. Otherwise, I can't see how this idea became so accepted among fans. Look in the " Snape's worst memory" chapter. He is detestable. First he's trying to cheat of his neighbor's exam, then outside he (besides all the pathetic stuff about watching James and the snitch) looked forward to watching Snape teased with "avid anticipation" and watched "hungrily" as Snape was laughed at, "sniggering shrilly" himself and later "roaring with laughter". None of the marauders showed great morals in that scene, but Wormtail sickened me the most. Lupin was cowardly, James arrogant, Sirius vicious, but Wormtail was wicked, psycophantic, even sociopathic. He enjoyed watching others in pain. He wasn't strong enough to do it himself, but he was even more pleased by Snape's humiliation than the others. JKR makes similar remarks about him in other places too. I'm not surprised he joined voldemort. After all, who could give more fuel for his sadistic fire than he could? Do not make harry's mistake and envision PP like another Neville. Neville does not deserve to be picked on by snape or malfoy- he is unpopular and less talented, but also kind and brave, selfless and honest. Wormtail, although superfically like Neville, has none of his good qualities. We always knew Neville has awesome potential, and it's really starting to show. I'm new to the group. I hope I'm not just bringing up already endlessly deliberated topics. From willsonkmom at msn.com Tue Nov 23 14:14:06 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2004 14:14:06 -0000 Subject: Veritaserum was Re: CHAPTER DISCUSSION: ch. 32 "Out of the Fire" In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118407 > Finwitch: > > Veritaserum... as I recall, Harry merely pretended to drink, thinking > of what Moody would say about accepting a drink from a known enemy. As > such, Harry already WAS on his guard. (so Snape's fake Veritaserum > didn't do much help...) > > Well, I suppose Snape DID tell some Order member at some point - > (while Harry was flying on a Thestral?)... > Potioncat: Harry started to drink then saw the kittens and did not drink. That doesn't take away from the fact that Snape tricked Umbridge with fake veritaserum. And I loved the part, "You didn't use it all? You only needed three drops." (paraphrased) We know Snape told the Order twice. He verified that Black was safe. We don't know what his plan was to tell Harry that Black was safe. (Or even if he planned to tell him.) I think one possibility is that Snape had reason to think Umbridge, Harry's gang and Draco's gang were in Umbridge's office, when in fact Harry and co had made it into the forrest and Draco's gang were tied up in the office. From finwitch at yahoo.com Tue Nov 23 14:15:11 2004 From: finwitch at yahoo.com (finwitch) Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2004 14:15:11 -0000 Subject: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118408 Clare wrote: > I sent this message to another group i belong to. Just wanted to see > what you make of it here. > Back in may, a friend printed for me some postings and articles from > the group. I've been trying to find them in the archive, but I > can't, so i'm posting this. -- > Anyway, a bully picks on someone because he is weak and squashing him > makes the bully feel stronger. Severus doesn't fit into > that "innocent weak" mold- he was unpopular, but James and Sirius did > not single him out for that; he was every bit as antagonistic as they > were and his own character flaws were his downfall. Envy, > spitefulness, vengeance, etc. Finwitch: Quite right, Snape *was* taking out a wand upon James *greeting* him! It was a duel - though informal one, but a duel never the less. What Sirius tells Harry of it afterwars: they loathed each other from first sight. Interestingly enough, after the Fight in Ministry of Magic, as Harry is encountered by Draco -- Draco is ALSO reaching for his wand, much like Snape was... As it was, James was getting/giving practice for their next OWL-exam, right? I mean, the *practical* OWL on DADA was the next exam... reviewing hexes - none of which did permanent harm nor made Snape unable to take the exam - well... -- After all, even as an adult he definitely > sunk lower than Sirius with his disparaging remarks in OOP, just > baiting Sirius for a fight. He also abuses his authority as a > teacher, not only against James' son, but also with innocent, > blundering Neville. Sirius didn't target innocent unpopular kids. > The same goes for Fred and George who will justify taking on real > bullies, like Motague or Dudley, and putting them in their places, > but would only protect Neville. Finwitch: Quite right - and as both James&Sirius were good in everything (Top marks, I think), well - I suppose Snape was the one offering a *challenge*. And besides, it was just a difference in speed which one got to hex the other... Anyway, Fred&George seem to be nicer to Harry, but oh well, it's not like we got to know the 15-year-old James Potter. And Fred&George - well, at 15 they gave Harry the Map and concentrated on starting WWW. At 16, they did what ever they could to finance their shop (without a loan), failing, but got the 1000 Gs from Harry in the end. at 17, they're ready to start (and I think that Padfoot was pleased to give them a room for stock-keeping, away from Molly etc.). They experiment at Hogwarts, build stock, sell their products in secret, advertise (on Umbridge, with full approval of the other teachers!) They make a *legend* of themselves upon leaving school - and Peeves takes an order from Fred. (not something that happens often, is it?) I think that Umbridge-itis made good money for them! And um - I think F&G were more *mature* at 15 than the MPPW. Finwitch From stevejjen at earthlink.net Tue Nov 23 14:25:02 2004 From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese) Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2004 14:25:02 -0000 Subject: Is Petunia older or younger than Lily? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118409 arizona: > So, according to the Lexicon's timeline, Lily was born in 1959. But > she starts Hogwarts in 1971 - which, depending on how you look at it, > doesn't make a lot of sense. Shouldn't she be starting in 1970, when > she's actually turning 11 years old? > > (See, this is why I don't entirely trust the timelines on the > Lexicon, which is otherwise really good.) Jen: Actually, I was using the time periods mentioned in the sections on Lily Potter and Dudley Dursley for my post upthread, which are slightly different from the ones you posted (guess there is some inconsistency there, although Steve at the Lexicon does use 'circa' with most dates to indicate approximation). arizona: > So Lily finishes Hogwarts in June 1978. Harry is born two years > later, not one, in July 1980. > > If Petunia is a year younger than Lily, she would not have had to > drop out of school in order to have him. (Especially as the timeline > says that Dudders was born on June 22 - does anybody know where that > came from? - Petunia would have finished school in June 1979, one > full year before Dudley would have been born. Jen: In the Dudley section at the Lexicon, there's a very convincing argument for Dudley being born June 23, 1980. As to whether Petunia was still in school when Lily graduated, that seems impossible to determine at this point. But you're right, there would have been two years between Lily leaving Hogwarts and having Harry, long enough for Petunia to finish school. Jen Reese From willsonkmom at msn.com Tue Nov 23 14:41:47 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2004 14:41:47 -0000 Subject: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118410 "Clare Durina" wrote: snip I have been feeling indignant at the > popular characterization of James and Sirius as bullies and the twins as well. Being "cool" does not make one bad, and being enviably > attractive or talented does not make one vindicive. I think that > they were immature, carried-away boys. Potioncat: Welcome to the group. I don't think any one says James and Sirius were popular, therefore they were bullies. But you know, being popular and good looking doesn't excuse you from being a bully. In the Pensieve scene, as written and in the follow up conversation between Harry, Black and Lupin, it is clear that the Marauders were picking on Snape. It is also clear from what Lily says, that James picked on other kids, "Hexing people in the hall, just because you can." The shocker was that this news came to us (and Harry) after 4 books of hearing how great James was. As for the Twins, they are very likable. No doubt. And it was funny that they shoved Montagu into that cabinet. But he is still suffering brain damage at the end of the book, and no goes to Pomfrey to tell her what happened. I don't brain damage is a fair swap for a few house points. Clare Durina: And while Sirius does have a > mean streak, it just makes him a more complex and convincing > character. Potioncat: Sorry, I don't think having a mean streak is a virtue. (But I will say, that as a Snape fan, I can hardly blast you for liking Sirius and his mean streak since I like Snape and his.) Clare Durina: Severus doesn't fit into > that "innocent weak" mold- he was unpopular, but James and Sirius did > not single him out for that; he was every bit as antagonistic as they > were and his own character flaws were his downfall. Potioncat: I don't think Severus was a sweet young man who never did anything wrong. And I don't doubt that we'll find out that Severus and James often gave as good as they got. But in this one scene, MWPP pick on him because they are bored. His character flaws was his downfall? That's the kettle calling the cauldron rusty. James and Sirius come over as pretty flawed too. Clare Durina: After all, even as an adult he definitely > sunk lower than Sirius with his disparaging remarks in OOP, just > baiting Sirius for a fight. He also abuses his authority as a > teacher, not only against James' son, but also with innocent, > blundering Neville. Sirius didn't target innocent unpopular kids. Potioncat: I see it as Black baiting Snape. Both characters come out looking like real idiots. I can't really explain or defend Snape's teaching methods. I do think he is targeting Harry and Neville for a reason. (other than spite.) Clare Durina: > The same goes for Fred and George who will justify taking on real > bullies, like Motague or Dudley, and putting them in their places, > but would only protect Neville. Potioncat: I agree, I don't think F&G would pick on anyone. But experimenting on first years wasn't very nice either. And I don't so much blame them for shoving Montagu into the cabinet, as I'm unhappy no one helped when it was realized how badly hurt he was. Clare Durina: > Here is another related point. I cannot agree that Wormtail was a > nice guy who went astray due to low self-esteem after years of his > cool friends' torment. He was never nice, and just like being strong > and talented does not make one offensive, being weak or talentless > does not make one innocent. Potioncat: Based on this one scene, Peter does not seem to have any redeeming values...of course, neither do James or Sirius. > Clare Durina: > I'm new to the group. I hope I'm not just bringing up already > endlessly deliberated topics. Again, welcome. Actually, everything has been endlessly deliberated, but that doesn't stop us from going on. From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Tue Nov 23 15:03:55 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2004 15:03:55 -0000 Subject: Too "Good" Harry / The resolution of Snape In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118411 SSSusan wrote: > > As for Harry's turning the other cheek being just too healthy & > > well-adjusted...hasn't Harry seemed overall a bit this already? > > Parents murdered, left with his abusive relatives, yet somehow > > knows how to choose the good & noble path? You know? So...what > > if he turned the other cheek but gritted his teeth while doing it > > and still vented to his friends? Would that make it more > > palatable? :-) > > > > Siriusly Snapey Susan, who thinks Harry *is* remarkably healthy & > > noble. Lupinlore: > I agree, Susan, that Harry is remarkably healthy and noble, indeed > already too much so to be entirely believable. To add a "martyr" > attitude toward Snape would, purely in my opinion, push things into > the realm of "completely unbelievable" and "far too much." I > suppose I was in the minority in very much enjoying the angry Harry > of OOTP. Certainly I felt like it was long overdue. And I thought > it much more realistic and enjoyable to read than the almost > mystical goodness he had displayed up to this point. I will be > very disappointed if JKR lapses back into more unbelievable > goodness, even if Harry turning the other cheek would be > the "right" thing to do. It's just not human behavior (except I > suppose from saints) and not believable. SSSusan: Oh, I, too, was one of the ones who appreciated CAPSLOCK!Harry in OotP! I thought it was, as you say, overdue and quite believable. I like Harry's noble core, but I think it makes him more human to show his frustration and anger at being ignored and kept out of the loop. I still *can* see Harry gritting his teeth & working w/ Snape in the future, though -- but we're just different there, Lupinlore. Now, I'm going to see if I can't get you to go back upthread to my other question from the post you referenced here. Rather than having Harry be too "martyr-like" with Snape, you said you would more prefer to have Snape die *or* have Snape change. Do you have a vision for how Snape might change in a believable way? [And not just Lupinlore - - if *anyone* has ideas for this, I'd love to read them. It's be exciting to contemplate, as I can't think up much on this myself.] Siriusly Snapey Susan From kethryn at wulfkub.com Tue Nov 23 15:25:10 2004 From: kethryn at wulfkub.com (Kethryn) Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2004 10:25:10 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Harry at the Dursleys References: Message-ID: <006e01c4d170$a0fa0a20$0402a8c0@carolina.rr.com> No: HPFGUIDX 118412 > > Kethryn now - > > snip. > > Therefore, while I do question the > > Dursley's and, to some extent, Snape's behavoir, I also take it > with a grain > > of salt because I do remember blowing things completely out of > porportion. > > Cleaning up after dinner was an ugly battle royal and I can > definatly > > remember thinking that I would rather die than clean the bathroom > on more > > than one occasion. > > > > So anyway, my thoughts on the matter. > > > Alla: > > If we were only to hear Harry's thoughts, than sure it could be > possible to think that he is blowing things out of proportion, but we > also see Dursleys' ACTIONS and Snape's actions, so I don't think he > is blowing it out of proportion much. > > Cleaning after dinner - sure, it is a necessary chore, but how about > trying to escape Petunia's frying pan? Do you think it is also a > normal routine? > > How about him at the age 14 still remembering how hungry he was last > summer, when he was sending food to Sirius? > > Of course, some exaggeration is there, but I don't think that a lot, Kethryn again - Again, I would be willing to lay better than even odds that Petunia expected Harry to dodge the frying pan (I'm at school and I don't have my books so I can't look that passage up and I only vaguly remember it). As for not eating, I remember thinking that one missed meal was THE END OF THE WORLD and, yes, the capslocks are done a-purpose. I also remember the few times that my mother spanked me...and I know for a fact that it has been exaggerated in my own mind from subsequent conversations with both my parents. I see Vernon's actions as enabling Dudley to be a bully. You see it as abuse. ~Shrugs~ it's just different readings and a different belief set, really. Ce la vie, we will just have to agree to disagree. Kethryn From foxmoth at qnet.com Tue Nov 23 16:55:10 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2004 16:55:10 -0000 Subject: Two Wormtails was Re: Plot in OotP (wand confusion) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118413 Various replies, scroll down for yours: Pippin, quoting PoA: Harry didn't understand what Snape was talking about. Nor, apparently, did Lupin. Nora: Then why his comments about the Map afterwards that clearly reveal that Lupin knows exactly what the Map is? Pippin: By now, you've realized that the line was a direct quote, not commentary from me. It beautifully illustrates the unreliability of our narrator, who is quite mistaken about what Lupin knows. The full passage also illustrates unequivocally that Lupin is not above equivocating. He says that the map looks like a parchment that insults whoever writes on it, and that it looks like a Zonko's product to him, when all the time he obviously knows it's a map. So, can we really trust *anything* Lupin says that sounds like it might be equivocal? I don't. Nora: That Pensieve scene bothers me so much, just because it causes all kinds of problems that Harry can hear things that Snape couldn't have possibly. I guess we have to go with 'It's magic!', or else I suspect it would be more common for people to pull out memories and go back to listen to things they couldn't have heard. This is a purely practical objection--the mechanics of the thing are cursedly unclear. Pippin: I think the pensieve must be so rare an item that most people have no idea such a thing even exists, much less that Dumbledore has one. I don't think Snape knew of its existence in GoF or he could have replayed the Egg and the Eye scene and discovered who FakeMoody was by looking at the map. BTW, there is, I've just noticed, a dead give-away in that scene that makes GoF a much fairer mystery than I thought. Moody tells Harry that Crouch is no longer on the map. We should have known that had to be a lie -- as Hermione says in another context later, Crouch didn't just evaporate. Khinterberg: But it surprises me how easily Snape lets oneof the said manufacturers have it back, although that could be due simply to there being students around, and we wouldn't want them to get too suspicious. Also though, I wonder why Lupin was so surprisedthat Harry did not want to turn the map in straightaway. Lupin was ateenager who helped write this map, he surely knows how it feels to beyoung boy getting into mischief? Harry has never been too concernedwith a threat over his own life, at thirteen years old I don't think keeping the map would have bothered him at all. Pippin: Yes, this is the crux of the confusion. If Snape 1)definitely knows that Lupin made the parchment 2) has believed all along that Lupin is working with Sirius 3) thinks that the parchment may contain instructions for getting to Hogsmeade then it would be madness to let Lupin walk away with the map. Of course the vampire threat might have something to do with it. ;-) Evidently Snape is not sure enough of his case to insist that the parchment be taken to Dumbledore, and that makes me think he's not quite sure who made it or what it does. Lupin wants Harry to see that if the map fell into Sirius's hands, it could help him get into the castle, or so he says. The telling thing is that after making a big deal of Harry's not turning it in, Lupin also does not do so. Renee: Who Wormtail is and what exactly Snape knows are two different mysteries. As you say, the first one is solved later in the books. On the later, we can only speculate but it doesn't change the fact that the first one is solved. (Pulling Occam's Razor again.) Pippin: The trouble with Occam's razor in this context is that we're only pretending that events in the Potterverse are related by cause and effect. Wielders of Occam's razor in the real world are not allowed to argue, for example, that God obviously *meant* to have the planets rotate around the Earth, and evidence to the contrary is just a Flint. If we are allowed to eliminate evidence at will, then Occam's razor can be used to prove anything. If we're not, then the case for two Wormtails and ESE!Lupin is immeasurably strengthened. Exactly what Snape knows is relevant because it speaks to the issue of how he learned of the nicknames and whether he knows who they belong to. Remember that the whole plot in PoA revolves around a case of mistaken identity. Everyone thinks that Sirius was the secret-keeper and must have been the spy, though he was neither. Now everyone thinks that Peter was the secret-keeper which is self-evident. But it is not self-evident that he must have been the spy just because the spy was known as Wormtail. Renee: ?? I don't see what harm it could do to tell James the spy went under the name Wormtail. So he would have told Sirius. What did DD think Sirius could do with this information? And if DD suspected Sirius *before* Halloween 1981 (is this canon?) he was criminally irresponsible anyway, to allow him to be the Secret Keeper. And are you saying James & Sirius wouldn't have suspected Peter if they'd been confronted with the name Wormtail? Pippin: It would be very important to Voldemort to know what information about the DE's is reaching Dumbledore, since it would help him discover which of his servants was a traitor. If Dumbledore did share this information with James, perhaps he made James promise not to tell anyone else. It is canon according to McGonagall that Dumbledore was worried about James's choice of secret-keeper, and that James insisted on using Sirius despite this. I don't think Sirius knew about the Wormtail name. But if James did, and thought that Dumbledore had eliminated Peter from consideration as the spy, then he would think that Peter was the ideal secret-keeper, since Voldemort would never think they'd use someone he'd managed to cast suspicion on. It might have worked, only, IMO, somebody told Voldemort about the switch. Pippin From nkafkafi at yahoo.com Tue Nov 23 17:24:51 2004 From: nkafkafi at yahoo.com (nkafkafi) Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2004 17:24:51 -0000 Subject: Two Wormtails was Re: Plot in OotP (wand confusion) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118414 > Pippin: > > Erm, of course there's a mystery about who Wormtail really is. > ---- > "You don't think it more likely he got it *directly from the > manufacturers*?" [emphasis JKR's]. > > Harry didn't understand what Snape was talking about. Nor, > apparently, did Lupin. > > "You mean, by Mr. Wormtail or one of these people?" he said. > --PoA ch 14 Neri: The mystery here is "who are Mooney, Wormtail, Padfoot and Prongs". Once this is mystery is solved, several chapters later, nowhere in canon a mystery is presented "who aside of Peter was ever called Wormtail". > Pippin: > Wormtail is identified later in the book when Lupin tells about > the Animagi. Neri: Lupin says this in front of Sirius, and Sirius does not correct him. Sirius later in the books refers to Peter as Wormtail. Voldemort calls Peter "Wormtail" in GoF Ch. 1 when he has no reason to think somebody can hear him. JKR refers to Wormtail several times in a context where it is obvious she means Peter. I repeat: nowhere in canon it is even hinted that another person was ever called Wormtail. I've yet to see even a mystery in the books which will be nicely solved if we assume that Wormtail was someone else than Peter. > Pippin: > But the mystery which is not solved, and has been > asked many times on this list, is "What did Snape know about > the 'manufacturers' that made him question Lupin?" > Neri: This is a different mystery, which relates to all four Marauders and not to Wormtail in particular. As several other members had already mentioned, there are other plausible solutions to it than Snape coming across the names during his DE years. Even if he did, why do you assume that, out of the four names, it was Wormtail that he recognized? The only reason I see to assume it was Wormtail is that the man we all know as Wormtail WAS indeed the spy in canon. If you assume he WASN"T really the spy, then Snape could have recognized any of the four names and mistakenly or correctly relate them to any of the four "manufacturers". Neri From steve at hp-lexicon.org Tue Nov 23 17:38:44 2004 From: steve at hp-lexicon.org (hp_lexicon) Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2004 17:38:44 -0000 Subject: Is Petunia older or younger than Lily? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118415 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Jen Reese" wrote: > > (See, this is why I don't entirely trust the timelines on the > > Lexicon, which is otherwise really good.) > is some inconsistency there, although Steve at the Lexicon does > use 'circa' with most dates to indicate approximation). > Thanks for pointing this out. We don't have exact dates for James, Lily, etc. That's why there's a c. in front of the dates. In fact, if you look at many of the dates, they appear twice or three times: once as c. XXXX, noe as YX (XXXX), and then possibly as just XXXX. That's because I wanted to be as accurate as possible. ONce is for events which are approximate, one is for events which are relative to other events, and one is for dates we are given specifically in canon. I don't care if you choose to not trust the timelines, but please read them correctly so you make your choice to trust or not trust honestly. I think some people think I just made stuff up or wrote my guesses down as exact facts, and I promise you that I didn't. How do we know when James etc. were born? There are a number of references, but the most clear is Jo's recent statement that Sirius was "about 22 years old" when he was sent to Azkaban. That means that James and Lily were also about 22 years old when they died. We can't say for sure how long it was between their deaths and Sirius's being sent to Azakaban, so none of these dates are exact, but we can get pretty darned close. Again, distrust the timelines all you like. Most of the errors have been spotted and fixed, but there is always the possiblity of more errors in something this complex. However, don't distrust it based on a faulty understanding of how it's put together or where the information comes from. Steve The Lexicon From azriona at juno.com Tue Nov 23 17:43:05 2004 From: azriona at juno.com (Sharon) Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2004 17:43:05 -0000 Subject: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118416 Welcome - I'm new too, actually! --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Clare Durina" wrote: I cannot agree that Wormtail was a > nice guy who went astray due to low self-esteem after years of his > cool friends' torment. He was never nice, and just like being strong > and talented does not make one offensive, being weak or talentless > does not make one innocent. It is not that we Peter Supporters are trying to say that Peter Pettigrew was a fine upstanding human being. (Well, not all of us.) I think what we are trying to say is that he was not always evil to the core. Was he tormented by James and Sirius? Did he have self- esteem problems? More than likely - otherwise he wouldn't have hero- worshipped James and Sirius quite as much as he did. But was he weak and talentless? Heck no. Let's look at the facts here. Peter Pettigrew did the following, according to canon, any way you spin it: 1. He fooled his friends into thinking he was not a Death Eater. 2. He successfully became an Animagi - even with help, this is a tough thing to do. 3. He killed 12 Muggles behind his back with very little pre-planning. 4. He found Voldemort in Albania without help. 5. He lured Bertha Jorkins to Voldy's lair, despite the fact that Bertha should have known that he was dead. 6. He gave Voldy some sort of body to exist in while waiting for the Final Task. 7. He brewed the potion that brought Voldy back to full power - and in doing so, cut off his own hand without painkillers. Now, does any of that say "Hi, I'm weak and defenseless and really stupid!!!!" Peter must have had some sort of talent if he was to brew those potions. He must have had some sort of strenght if he was to kill 12 Muggles in one blow. He must have had some sort of (twisted) loyalty to find Voldy in Albania when he simply could have disappeared to somewhere else, and made it that much harder for Sirius and Remus to find him again. He'd hid under their noses for twelve years already, remember - he was certainly capable of doing it again. Claire Durina: Why should we feel for him? Maybe too > many of us adult HP fans were unpopular as kids and are drawing an > illogical connection between Pettigrew and themselves. Otherwise, I > can't see how this idea became so accepted among fans. Entirely possible, yes. But most of us who were tormented as youngsters didn't become mass murderers. But I do not believe that unpopularity causes sympathy for Peter Pettigrew - I think a profound understanding of the choices one is forced to make in life does. Claire Durina: Look in the " > Snape's worst memory" chapter. He is detestable. First he's trying > to cheat of his neighbor's exam, Not necessarily. Yeah, yeah, I know what it looks like. But we only know from Harry's viewpoint that he's trying to cheat. Personally, I think Peter was just trying to figure out if he was ahead or behind - and a way of doing that was to see how far along his neighbors had gotten on their tests. Also, if his answer to question 42 was one sentence, but the person next to him had written three or four, he might go back and reconsider extending his answer. I don't consider that to be cheating. Claire Durina: Lupin was > cowardly, James arrogant, Sirius vicious, but Wormtail was wicked, > psycophantic, even sociopathic. He enjoyed watching others in pain. > He wasn't strong enough to do it himself, but he was even more > pleased by Snape's humiliation than the others. Hold on. James and Sirius weren't wicked by actually starting the torment? Lupin wasn't psychophantic by allowing them to do as they wished, thereby silently condoning their actions? Sirius isn't sociopathic by simply torturing another student simply because he's *bored*?!? To say that Peter was psychophantic and sociopathic is stretching one moment in a lifetime to gargantuan proportions. Claire Durina: JKR makes similar > remarks about him in other places too. Where? JKR has actually made very few remarks about Peter in public. Generally she avoids questions about him entirely, or answers "Oh, I can't tell you that yet." Most recently she has given reasons for us to believe that Peter will play a larger role in the events of HBP. Claire Durina: Neville does not deserve to be picked on by snape > or malfoy- he is unpopular and less talented, but also kind and > brave, selfless and honest. Wormtail, although superfically like > Neville, has none of his good qualities. Oh? Peter is loyal. He could have run to Canada instead of Albania - instead, he went and found Voldy. Peter is brave. He stands up to Voldy, trying to convince him to go after a wizard other than Harry. Can you picture Malfoy doing the same? Peter is smart. He outsmarts his friends, the Order, and most of the wizarding world. He brews difficult potions and he manages to ressurrect the dead. Now. Do I think Peter and Neville are exactly alike? No. Peter was part of a group, one of four. Neville has not been included in the Trio, and he has been largely excluded, it seems, from the intimacies of Seamus & Dean's friendship. It is possible that Neville has been far more excluded and ignored than Peter ever was. If anything, Peter had it *better* than Neville. Does that alone excuse Peter for turning to the Death Eaters? Not a chance. *Why* Peter went to Voldemort I can't tell you for certain. I can only give you suppositions and theories, of which there are plenty. But only the weakest (and admittedly least interesting) involve him going over purely because he was stupid, boorish, and untrustworthy. After all...Voldemort wouldn't have wanted a servant with those qualities either. --azriona, who is a long-time Peter Sympathizer, and tends to take him a bit too much to heart. She hopes you forgive her for that... From azriona at juno.com Tue Nov 23 17:55:55 2004 From: azriona at juno.com (Sharon) Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2004 17:55:55 -0000 Subject: Is Petunia older or younger than Lily? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118417 Steve: > I don't care if you choose to not trust the timelines, but please > read them correctly so you make your choice to trust or not trust > honestly. I think some people think I just made stuff up or wrote my > guesses down as exact facts, and I promise you that I didn't. > I apologize. I shouldn't have said that I actually distrust the timelines, but I have seen far too many arguments between people, where one group swears up and down that the Marauders were born in 1960, and another claims 1961, and evil words have been said, and so on and so forth. The 'circas' leave enough room for mobility, and most of us get caught up in our own preconceptions to allow another viewpoint. I totally respect what you've done with the Lexicon, and I do find myself going to reference it quite often. (I know my Dad reads it and sends me links about once a week.) And the research you and your assistants have done is impeccible. I don't distrust it based on the research done or the thought put into it. You've done more work on that part of the HP world than anyone save JKR herself, I think. So I apologize if any misunderstanding was taken, because it wasn't meant that way. -azriona From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Tue Nov 23 18:18:12 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2004 18:18:12 -0000 Subject: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118418 Finwitch wrote : "Snape *was* taking out a wand upon James *greeting* him!" Del comments : It wasn't a greeting, it was a public insult. That doesn't completely justify Snape getting his wand out, granted, but let's try and keep things into context. Del From steve at hp-lexicon.org Tue Nov 23 18:17:20 2004 From: steve at hp-lexicon.org (hp_lexicon) Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2004 18:17:20 -0000 Subject: Is Petunia older or younger than Lily? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118419 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Sharon" wrote: > I don't distrust it based on the research done or the thought put > into it. You've done more work on that part of the HP world than > anyone save JKR herself, I think. So I apologize if any > misunderstanding was taken, because it wasn't meant that way. > Oh, you don't need to apologize! I'm not upset. I just want to make sure that people understand the way I wrote it. I spent a lot of time trying to work out a system of noting dates that would make it clear which ones we knew for a fact and which ones we had to estimate. Thanks for your kind comments. I'm so glad you find the Lexicon useful. Steve The Lexicon From mgrantwich at yahoo.com Tue Nov 23 18:29:48 2004 From: mgrantwich at yahoo.com (Magda Grantwich) Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2004 10:29:48 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Is Petunia older or younger than Lily? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041123182948.78218.qmail@web53108.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 118420 I think Petunia is older than Lily and my reason hinges on Vernon. In the opening chapter of PS/SS, when we know the Potters must have been in their early 20's at the latest, Vernon is described as being the director of a drill company. Vernon must be in his mid-30's at least because a director is a pretty senior position in any company and I rather doubt he could have got to that level by his mid-20's. So if Vernon is 35ish or so, Petunia must be at least 25 or 26. Otherwise she'd have to be 20 or 21, and they must have married when she was 18. Which is really cramping a timeline. So I'd say: CHapter 1 of PS/SS = Vernon 35; Petunia 25/26/27; James and Lily 22/21. Harry and Dudley: 15 and 16 months respectively. Magda __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? The all-new My Yahoo! - Get yours free! http://my.yahoo.com From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Tue Nov 23 18:47:27 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2004 18:47:27 -0000 Subject: Harry at the Dursleys In-Reply-To: <006e01c4d170$a0fa0a20$0402a8c0@carolina.rr.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118421 > Kethryn again - Again, I would be willing to lay better than even odds that Petunia expected Harry to dodge the frying pan (I'm at school and I don't have my books so Ican't look that passage up and I only vaguly remember it). Alla: No, she did not expect him to dodge the frying pan. (I reserve the possibility that I could be wrong, but very small one, because I remember passage well, but don't have the book with me right now) Kethryn: > As for not eating, I remember thinking that one missed meal was THE END OF THE WORLD and, yes, the capslocks are done a-purpose. Alla: Harry is ALWAYS hungry at Dursleys, not just missing one meal or two. When he eats, he describes in details what he is given and I don't know, but to me it clearly does not seem to be enough, Kethryn: > I see Vernon's actions as enabling Dudley to be a bully. You see it as abuse. ~Shrugs~ it's just different readings and a different belief set,really. Ce la vie, we will just have to agree to disagree. Alla: So, you are saying that Dursleys themselves did not abuse Harry at all, EVER (and yes, Dudley is definitely a bully too)? Yeah, we most definitely have to agree to disagree, because even though much worse cases of abuse exist, this one is definitely it, IMO. From foxmoth at qnet.com Tue Nov 23 18:53:01 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2004 18:53:01 -0000 Subject: Two Wormtails was Re: Plot in OotP (wand confusion) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118422 Neri: I repeat: nowhere in canon it is even hinted that another person was ever called Wormtail. > I've yet to see even a mystery in the books which will be nicely solved if we assume that Wormtail was someone else than Peter.< Pippin: In GoF, there was no mystery that was nicely solved by the existence of two Barty's unless and until you had convinced yourself that Moody was a fake. There was ample evidence of that. But all of it could have been explained in other and far more intuitive ways, right up until Dumbledore said, "That is not Alastor Moody." In PoA, there was no mystery that was nicely solved by Scabbers being Peter, unless you were willing to consider that Sirius might be innocent of betraying the secret, and Peter guilty. All the evidence that Peter was Scabbers could have been explained in other, more obvious ways -- until Peter was disenchanted. Unless one is willing to consider that Lupin might be guilty and Peter innocent of being the spy, there's little point in two Wormtails, I agree. All the evidence can be explained in more intuitive ways. But the evidence of Lupin's guilt is there, and can't be entirely ruled out without invoking Flints. Pippin From cat_kind at yahoo.com Tue Nov 23 19:22:33 2004 From: cat_kind at yahoo.com (cat_kind) Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2004 19:22:33 -0000 Subject: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118423 Clare Durina: > I have been feeling indignant at the > popular characterization of James and Sirius as bullies and the twins > as well. Being "cool" does not make one bad, and being enviably > attractive or talented does not make one vindicive. I think that > they were immature, carried-away boys. And while Sirius does have a > mean streak, it just makes him a more complex and convincing > character. (snip) > Anyway, a bully picks on someone because he is weak and squashing him > makes the bully feel stronger. catkind: This is interesting. It seems to me that a lot of characters in the books display bullying behaviour of one sort or another. I'd agree with Clare's definition of bullying above up to a point: she says a bully picks on someone because he is weak. I think this is an oversimplification - no one is perfect, and that includes the victims of bullying. There is often another reason as well. Maybe the bully wouldn't pick on the victim if they were not weak, but that doesn't mean the victim has to be sweet and virtuous. I'd say picking on someone who is weaker than you is still bullying. It seems to me that James and Sirius bully Snape, because they carry on tormenting him, and humiliating him publicly, when he is outnumbered and they are evidently stronger than him. If we try to excuse them we find ourselves saying things like, "he deserved it", which sounds rather like a classic bully's rationalisation. Umbridge and Snape bully Harry and his friends. George and Fred bully some rather unpleasant Slytherins. I'd even say that Harry and his friends "bully" Malfoy and co on occasion - leaving someone dripping from the luggage racks doesn't seem like justified retaliation to me, nor does Harry and a Weasley beating someone up in retaliation for mere jibes. They are obviously by far the stronger party. And what about Harry's taunting Malfoy about his father? Malfoy is of course himself a bully, although usually more the verbal than the physical kind. Of course, most of these characters have many other sides to their personalities (well, maybe not Umbridge and Malfoy). It would seem highly biased to label Sirius, say, as a bully, and write him off as that. On the other hand, the fact that he is a complex character and "cool" does not change the fact that he was acting as a bully. Dare I say, many teenagers do, at one point or another. catkind From foxmoth at qnet.com Tue Nov 23 19:25:48 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2004 19:25:48 -0000 Subject: Harry at the Dursleys In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118424 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "dumbledore11214" wrote: > > > Kethryn again - > Again, I would be willing to lay better than even odds that Petunia > expected Harry to dodge the frying pan (I'm at school and I don't > have my books so Ican't look that passage up and I only vaguly > remember it). > > > Alla: > > No, she did not expect him to dodge the frying pan. (I reserve the possibility that I could be wrong, but very small one, because I remember passage well, but don't have the book with me right now)< Pippin: We don't know what Petunia expected. The narrator says that Harry "had to duck" to avoid being hit, but as usual we don't know how objective this opinion is. What struck me in re-reading the passage is that Harry had, in fact, been bullying Dudley for the last month, though lately the fun had gone out of it because Harry wasn't getting his letters. The narrator doesn't encourage us to weigh this in considering Petunia's state of mind. I have no beef against considering the Dursleys abusive, anyway. My only objection is considering them so abusive that any alternative including PamperedPrince!Harry, Dead!Harry,or RepeatedlyHavinghisGuardiansSlaughtered!Harry would be preferable. Pippin From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Tue Nov 23 19:46:51 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2004 19:46:51 -0000 Subject: Harry at the Dursleys In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118425 Pippin: I have no beef against considering the Dursleys abusive, anyway. My only objection is considering them so abusive that any alternative including PamperedPrince!Harry, Dead!Harry,or RepeatedlyHavinghisGuardiansSlaughtered!Harry would be preferable. Alla: Eh? I am not very comfortable with dividing abuse into degrees, but I said many times that much worse cases of abuse exist. My ONLY objection is considering Dursleys not abusive at all. As to those readings, well let me just say that I consider to be PamperedPrince!Harry to be Dumbledore's paranoya anyway, IF Dumbledore considered it to be a danger EVER. Am I being clear? The fact that Dumbledore may feel that he failed Tom Riddle, does not give him a right to mistreat another kid, just because Dumbledore afraid that this kid may go bad, BUT I don't believe that this was the reason anyway, or I want to think so. Again, to ME the only reading, where Dumbledore is a good man who has to make a difficult choice is where he wants to save Harry and realises that he cannot do it any other way but leave the boy with Dursleys From nrenka at yahoo.com Tue Nov 23 19:52:15 2004 From: nrenka at yahoo.com (nrenka) Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2004 19:52:15 -0000 Subject: Two Wormtails was Re: Plot in OotP (wand confusion) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118426 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "pippin_999" wrote: > Pippin: > > By now, you've realized that the line was a direct quote, not > commentary from me. It beautifully illustrates the unreliability > of our narrator, who is quite mistaken about what Lupin knows. The > full passage also illustrates unequivocally that Lupin is not > above equivocating. He says that the map looks like a > parchment that insults whoever writes on it, and that it looks > like a Zonko's product to him, when all the time he obviously > knows it's a map. So, can we really trust *anything* Lupin says > that sounds like it might be equivocal? I don't. I respectfully submit that this is one of the cases where the narrator is not so much unreliable as simply reporting Harry's feelings, and Harry is mistaken--and obviously so. I came out of this exchange knowing that both Snape and Lupin knew something. Harry is certainly not the only character in the books to make mistakes of knowledge (per all the times Snape 'knows' something), but we do get funneled Harry's mistakes more directly. The second part of your argument is something of a slippery slope. It's true that Lupin is equivocating. However, by the end of the book, we have a remarkably clear context for WHY he is equivocating, and that he is certainly not the only one doing so throughout the book. It's a big step from the assertion "Lupin is equivocating in PoA" to the statement that "Anything Lupin says that MIGHT be equivocal IS". ESE!Lupin, as I've been tracing it, requires everything Lupin both says and does to be hiding a seekrit agenda. None of Lupin's actions are what they seem, in this theory. He's killed more people than anyone else in the series. :) Dumbledore has been incompletely truthful with us. Is he hiding something behind every corner? Hermione has equivocated with us, about what she's actually been up to. It's really all about context--strip actions of that, and you can make Lucius Malfoy a saint (he's such a concerned parent, after all) and every single person in the OotP ESE. > Pippin: > > Yes, this is the crux of the confusion. If Snape > 1)definitely knows that Lupin made the parchment > 2) has believed all along that Lupin is working with Sirius > 3) thinks that the parchment may contain instructions for getting > to Hogsmeade > > then it would be madness to let Lupin walk away with the map. > Of course the vampire threat might have something to do with it. > ;-) > > Evidently Snape is not sure enough of his case to insist that the > parchment be taken to Dumbledore, and that makes me think > he's not quite sure who made it or what it does. Don't forget, as well, that Dumbledore does not seem approving of Snape's one-man crusade against Lupin, and Snape seems to actually care what Dumbledore thinks of him (per the bitter exchange with Moody in GoF). I don't think Snape knows what it does, but I think he knows for sure it has some connection to Lupin. -Nora wonders if, eventually, the weight of ESE!Lupin will be enough to scuttle the GARBAGESCOW? :) From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Tue Nov 23 20:04:28 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2004 20:04:28 -0000 Subject: Purely evil In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118427 khinterberg wrote: > > > > This quote has interested me for some time now. > > > > Q. Tom Houseman asked, "Do you think that anyone in real life is > truly wholly evil like Draco Malfoy and Voldemort?" > > > > A. Rowling said, "My instinct is to say that probably not, but I > can t answer that question without ruining the series for you." Rowling said that in future books she will attempt to show "why Voldemort is who he is." > > > > The Star-Ledger, Newark, NJ > > > > 16 October 1999 > > > > Is she telling us that neither Voldemort nor Draco are completely > > evil? I like to think so, because it would make the plot and > character development so interesting. I'm not a fan of black and white goodness and evil, and I like to think of this quote as showing us, the fans, that Jo doesn't either, even for her "evil" characters. azriona wrote: > I kind of think it could go either way. I mean, if JKR said "Why, > yes. There are people in life who are purely evil from Day One and > that's that", then you'd have the possibility that Draco or Lucius or Voldy are pure evil. > > If you had JKR saying "No, no one can be pure evil" then you've got > fans who say "Look! There's hope for those three yet!" > > Either way she answers, she's toast. > > -- Carol responds: The problem for me is in the wording of the question, which *assumes* that Draco (a boy of sixteen in the next book) is already purely evil like Voldemort. Admittedly, Tom Riddle was already purely evil at fifteen or sixteen, releasing a basilisk with the intention of killing Muggleborns, and at sixteen or seventeen, murdering his own family, but I don't put the bullying, badmouthing Draco in the same category--yet. He has yet to make the choices that Tom made, or even the decision to join the DEs. The question also relates to real life, but JKR has turned it around to relate to the books. I think she's leaving room for what we already know is her view: No one is born evil, not even descendants of Salazar Slytherin with the ability to speak Parseltongue programmed into their genes. Voldemort is partly the product of circumstances but mostly the product of his own wrong decisions. IMO, there was still some hope for his redemption even after he put the memory of himself into the diary to continue "Salazar Slytherin's noble work," but once he cast that first Unforgiveable Curse, murdering a parent or grandparent in cold blood, he was beyond redemption. It will be interesting to see whether JKR agrees with this view. As for real life, which is what the question actually relates to, I'm not sure whether she would consider someone like Saddam Hussein or Osama bin Laden wholly evil. (I do, but her politics and values don't always correspond with mine.) Carol From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Tue Nov 23 20:12:54 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2004 20:12:54 -0000 Subject: Two Wormtails was Re: Plot in OotP (wand confusion) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118428 Renee wrote: > I don't see what harm it could do to tell James the spy went > under the name Wormtail. So he would have told Sirius. What did DD > think Sirius could do with this information? And if DD suspected > Sirius *before* Halloween 1981 (is this canon?) he was criminally > irresponsible anyway, to allow him to be the Secret Keeper. > And are you saying James & Sirius wouldn't have suspected Peter if > they'd been confronted with the name Wormtail? Carol responds: All we know is that Dumbledore suspected that someone close to James was the spy and he offered himself as Secret Keeper. It was James who insisted on Sirius despite Dumbledore's objections and Sirius who insisted on Peter, a change that DD apparently didn't know about. There's no criminal irresponsibility involved since he had no control over the situation. He no longer had the authority to "allow" or forbid MWPP or Lily to do anything. They were out of school and of age to make their own decisions, right or wrong. Carol From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Tue Nov 23 20:29:23 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2004 20:29:23 -0000 Subject: Harry at the Dursleys In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118429 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Geoff Bannister" wrote: > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" > wrote: > > Carol, wondering if "cot" is British for what we Americans call a crib > > Geoff: > A cot is normally a child's bed fitted with rails, one set of which > slide down to allow access. They are not far short of an ordinary > single bed in size and are also used for elderly folk or in hospitals > to prevent occupants from falling out. > > A crib usually describes a small baby's bed, possibly small enough to > be carried around with the owners in residence. Carol responds: So a cot *is* what Americans call a crib (a child's bed with slide down railings). The portable baby bed would be a bassinette, or at least that's what it was called when I had occasion to think about the matter. (Since prunes are now "dried plums" and "put to sleep" is now "put down," I don't know what anything is called any more unless some young person chides me for my ignorance and informs me of the "correct" terminology.) A cot in American English is (or was) a foldaway canvas bed with metal or wooden supports, as in "army cot." Not a suitable bed for a fifteen-month-old since he could easily climb out of it and toddle around in the dark! Carol From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Tue Nov 23 20:46:13 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2004 20:46:13 -0000 Subject: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118430 Clare Durina wrote: "Severus doesn't fit into that "innocent weak" mold- he was unpopular, but James and Sirius did not single him out for that;" Del replies : Severus was unpopular because he was in the Dark Arts, which is also the same reason James and Sirius picked on him. So no, technically they didn't pick on him because he was unpopular, but the two issues are strongly related nonetheless. Clare Durina wrote: "he was every bit as antagonistic as they were and his own character flaws were his downfall. Envy, spitefulness, vengeance, etc. " Del replies : What downfall ?? If anyone had a downfall because of their flaws, it was Sirius and James. Clare Durina wrote: "If the tables had turned at some point and he had had friends to back him up and James were alone, I believe he would have been much more shamelessly ruthless with that upperhand than JP or SB ever were." Del replies : Could be, but as you pointed out, this is only your belief. In fact, we do know that Snape belonged to a gang of Slytherins, but we haven't yet heard that he did anything horrible to James with the help of that gang. Clare Durina wrote: " After all, even as an adult he definitely sunk lower than Sirius with his disparaging remarks in OOP, just baiting Sirius for a fight." Del replies : Except that when the fight does break out, it was Sirius who had done the baiting, not Snape - twice, in fact : once at the beginning of the discussion, and once again when Snape was actually leaving the room. It's all in the Occlumency chapter. Clare Durina wrote: " He also abuses his authority as a teacher, not only against James' son, but also with innocent, blundering Neville." Del replies : This one, we all pretty much agree on. Clare Durina wrote: " Sirius didn't target innocent unpopular kids." Del replies : Do we know that ? We do know that James hexed anyone who "annoyed him". We can assume that he had at least Sirius's acceptation, if not support or even collaboration. It's just an assumption, but it's about as valid as saying that Sirius didn't hex innocent kids. Clare Durina wrote: "I cannot agree that Wormtail was a nice guy who went astray due to low self-esteem after years of his cool friends' torment." Del replies : You don't have to agree. Clare Durina wrote: " He was never nice," Del replies : How do you know that ? We don't know anything about young Peter, except what is in the Pensieve scene and what his so-called friends thought of him. Clare Durina wrote: " and just like being strong and talented does not make one offensive, being weak or talentless does not make one innocent." Del replies : Agreed. Clare Durina wrote: " Why should we feel for him?" Del replies : Why not ?? We are all free to feel for whoever we want. I personally feel for young Tom Riddle. I know it's useless, but so what ? Clare Durina wrote: " Maybe too many of us "adult HP fans were unpopular as kids and are drawing an illogical connection between Pettigrew and themselves. " Del replies : Maybe, maybe not. And who said the connection was illogical ? How do we know that it isn't intentional, that JKR isn't deliberately trying to make us connect with less-talented Peter who hero-worshipped his friends ? Clare Durina wrote: "Otherwise, I can't see how this idea became so accepted among fans. " Del replies : It isn't. From what I can read, there are many more people despising Peter than people defending him. I'm not on any side, for that matter. I try to just wait and see, with eyes wide open. Clare Durina wrote: "Look in the "Snape's worst memory" chapter. He is detestable." Del replies : All the Marauders are detestable in that scene. Clare Durina wrote: " First he's trying to cheat of his neighbor's exam," Del replies : So ? Harry wished he could read the answers in Parvati's head, does that make him detestable ? Clare Durina wrote: "then outside he (besides all the pathetic stuff about watching James and the snitch) looked forward to watching Snape teased with "avid anticipation" and watched "hungrily" as Snape was laughed at, "sniggering shrilly" himself and later "roaring with laughter"." Del replies : Sirius looked "like a dog that has scented a rabbit", before Peter looked with "avid anticipation". Some students looked "entertained" when Peter watched "hungrily". "Several people watching laughed" when Peter "sniggered shrilly". "Many people in the small crowd cheered" when "Sirius, James and Wormtail roared with laughter". You're not being very fair towards Peter in this scene. He's not doing anything worse than some other students, including James and Sirius. Clare Durina wrote: " None of the marauders showed great morals in that scene, but Wormtail sickened me the most." Del replies : That's your feelings, you're entitled to them, but nobody else has to react the same way. Many do though. Including the narrator, who is IMO obviously partial to Harry. For example, he calls Peter by his diminutive nickname, Wormtail, while he calls all the other Marauders by their first names. This is a problem we've already encountered in other occasions, but it doesn't help in judging Peter. When the narrator says that Peter was watching hungrily, or that he had an air of avid anticipation, is this true, or is it the narrator, who doesn't like Peter, projecting his own dislike of Peter on Peter's actions and looks ? When he says that Peter sniggered shrilly, does it really mean that Peter was the only one taking a vicious pleasure in the scene, the only one acting in a despicable way ? Or does it only mean that the narrator particularly notices Peter because he despises him particularly ? Clare Durina wrote: "Lupin was cowardly, James arrogant, Sirius vicious, but Wormtail was wicked, psycophantic, even sociopathic." Del replies : You're going a bit too far IMO. If anything, Peter was the *least* wicked of the 4. He only watched, he didn't encourage or prompt, and he certainly didn't DO the teasing. He didn't stop J&S either, granted, but then he was neither Remus (who as a Prefect had a duty to stop the fight - and honestly, I doubt J&S would have listened to Peter if he had tried to stop them), nor Lily (who is depicted as particularly admirable, not average). Peter was just watching and laughing, like several other students. Clare Durina wrote: "He enjoyed watching others in pain." Del replies : Snape wasn't in pain, he was "only" humiliated. And several other students seemed to have no problem with this. As the narrator points out, "Snape was clearly unpopular". Clare Durina wrote: " He wasn't strong enough to do it himself, but he was even more pleased by Snape's humiliation than the others." Del replies : *More* pleased ? Where do you see that ? He seems just as pleased as many other students. Clare Durina wrote: " JKR makes similar remarks about him in other places too." Del replies : Could you point out those remarks ? I'd be particularly interested in knowing who says those remarks. Is it JKR herself in interviews, is it the narrator, or is it one of the characters and if so which one ? Clare Durina wrote: "I'm not surprised he joined voldemort. After all, who could give more fuel for his sadistic fire than he could?" Del replies : Sadistic fire ? I won't deny that Peter has a sadistic streak, but I really don't see how we can conclude that it is any greater than in any other kid. Clare Durina wrote: " Do not make harry's mistake and envision PP like another Neville. Neville does not deserve to be picked on by snape or malfoy- he is unpopular and less talented, but also kind and brave, selfless and honest. Wormtail, although superfically like Neville, has none of his good qualities. We always knew Neville has awesome potential, and it's really starting to show." Del replies : I agree to the feeling. But I must slightly disagree technically. We know more about Neville because we've seen more of him. We also know that Peter betrayed Harry's parents, and this is bound to taint our view of him younger. We have also witnessed his pathetic defense at the end of PoA, and his snivelling behaviour when around LV in GoF, and those weren't depicting him in a good light either. But those events happened much later in Peter's life. Moreover most (all ?) people who talk about him don't have a good opinion of him. Sirius never had any respect for him as far as we can see. McGonagall speaks of him in ways that are strikingly similar to those she would use to talk of Neville until GoF (my memory keeps telling me that she actually said that Neville reminds her of Peter, but as I don't have my PoA with me, I can't confirm that). But we know that Neville has potential, no matter what other people think of him. So we should be careful when judging Peter. As for James and Sirius being bullies, well, this IS what Lily calls James : "you're just an arrogant, bullying toerag, Potter". She was admittedly a bit angry, but she did use the word. Del From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Tue Nov 23 20:47:03 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2004 20:47:03 -0000 Subject: The Map (was: Two Wormtails) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118431 Arcum wrote: > > First, note that Snape mentions "Dark Magic", not "Defense Against the Dark Arts" as Lupin's area of expertise. > > > > Second, Snape suggests the parchment is "full of Dark Magic", and Lupin evades the question, and never gives a straight answer. > > > > Were the dark arts involved in it's creation? And was Lupin the one casting it? > > > > Potioncat: > It's been done several times in the books that DADA is called simply > dark arts. But there could be two things going on: the DADA teacher > would have to know dark magic to defend against it OR Snape could be > getting a dig in that Lupin is a Dark Creature. Carol responds: I think the fact that DADA is Lupin's subject is Snape's excuse for calling him in. He certainly doesn't think that Lupin is more of an expert than he is in that subject, but he suspects Lupin of being one of the "manufacturers" and needs a pretext for consulting him. I think he would know without Lupin's help whether the parchment was full of Dark magic. What he wants to know, probably, is what the parchment really is or does. I agree with your (snipped) comment that Snape doesn't want Harry to have the parchment, which he rightly suspects is an aid to mischief. Since Lupin confiscates it, he accomplishes at least one of his objectives though he's forced to trust Lupin not to give it back. And if he thought it really was full of Dark Magic, he'd have reported it to Dumbledore, which would have forced Lupin to reveal his secrets, including Sirius Black's ability to sneak into Hogwarts using secret passageways. Clearly, Snape didn't do that since Lupin still has the map at the end of the book and DD hasn't gone to confront Sirius in the Shrieking Shack. Carol From foxmoth at qnet.com Tue Nov 23 20:50:14 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2004 20:50:14 -0000 Subject: Lupin Equivocating was Two Wormtails In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118432 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "nrenka" wrote: > > The second part of your argument is something of a slippery slope. It's true that Lupin is equivocating. However, by the end of the book, we have a remarkably clear context for WHY he is equivocating, and that he is certainly not the only one doing so throughout the book.< Pippin: Can you expand on that a little? Lupin *says* he was holding back what he knew about Sirius being an Animagus because he didn't want to expose his own earlier misdeeds and lose Dumbledore's trust. Therefore, he convinced himself that Sirius being an Animagus had nothing to do with how he was getting into the school. All well and good, but when it's pointed out that this amounted to putting Harry's life at risk from a terrorist murderer in order to save his own reputation, Lupin's defenders inevitably counter that he must actually have believed Sirius innocent all along. There's no canon for that, but it's a possible interpretation. But it makes the context muddy again. And it still doesn't explain anything about why Lupin doesn't tell the truth about the map, or at least turn it in to Dumbledore. BTW, do we have any examples of a character using an equivocal style who doesn't ever equivocate? Nora: It's a big step from the assertion "Lupin is equivocating in PoA" to the statement that "Anything Lupin says that MIGHT be equivocal IS". ESE!Lupin, as I've been tracing it, requires everything Lupin both says and does to be hiding a seekrit agenda. None of Lupin's actions are what they seem, in this theory. He's killed more people than anyone else in the series. :) Pippin: There's no point in going to such extremes of misdirection in order to hide a minor crime or two. If the reader is ever to find ESE!Lupin believable, there have to be clues in every scene, just as there are with Fake!Moody, Tom Riddle, or Quirrell. (But not, as you will note, with Scabbers, who sometimes behaves quite innocently. ) Nora: > Dumbledore has been incompletely truthful with us. Is he hiding something behind every corner? < Pippin: Dumbledore's concealments are aimed squarely at defeating Voldemort and protecting Harry. Hermione has those motives, plus a taste for revenge that she will eventually, IMO, confront and defeat. Lupin, I think, is a character who failed that test, but we'll see. By his own admission, what he cared about in PoA was saving his own skin first. That can't be good. Pippin From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Tue Nov 23 20:54:01 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2004 20:54:01 -0000 Subject: CHAPTER DISCUSSION: ch. 32 "Out of the Fire" In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118433 Finwitch wrote: > > Veritaserum... as I recall, Harry merely pretended to drink, thinking > of what Moody would say about accepting a drink from a known enemy. As > such, Harry already WAS on his guard. (so Snape's fake Veritaserum > didn't do much help...) Carol responds: Nevertheless, Snape was acting in Harry's best interests in case Harry himself didn't. The fact that the veritaserum was fake shows Snape's opposition to Umbridge and loyalty to the Order and Dumbledore whether Harry actually drank it or not. (Yet another thwarted attempt to "save" Harry though this time it wasn't Harry's life but crucial information about Sirius that was at stake.) Carol From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Tue Nov 23 21:09:43 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2004 21:09:43 -0000 Subject: Veritaserum was Re: CHAPTER DISCUSSION: ch. 32 "Out of the Fire" In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118434 Potioncat wrote: > Harry started to drink then saw the kittens and did not drink. That > doesn't take away from the fact that Snape tricked Umbridge with > fake veritaserum. And I loved the part, "You didn't use it all? > You only needed three drops." (paraphrased) > > We know Snape told the Order twice. He verified that Black was > safe. We don't know what his plan was to tell Harry that Black was > safe. (Or even if he planned to tell him.) > > I think one possibility is that Snape had reason to think Umbridge, > Harry's gang and Draco's gang were in Umbridge's office, when in > fact Harry and co had made it into the forrest and Draco's gang were > tied up in the office. Carol responds: That makes sense and explains his "stalling." He would not know that Harry, Hermione and Umbridge had gone into the forest until he rescued Draco et al. and sorted out that mess (undoing hexes, sending Draco to Madame Pomfrey if necessary, and getting the details from angry Slytherins all talking at once. He would have consulted Dumbledore first (otherwise he wouldn't know that DD was on his way to 12 Grimauld Place) and then consulted the Order for the second time. My only question is how he found out that the Inquisitorial Squad was tied up in Umbridge's office. Someone must have finally broken free and gone to tell him. By that time, Harry and friends were already at the DoM and probably in the middle of their fight with the DEs. As for Snape not deducing sooner that Harry had gone to the DoM, why would he? He knew that Harry couldn't apparate from Hogwarts even if he knew how. He also knew that Harry didn't have access to his broom. He knew that Buckbeak was in Grimauld Place with Sirius. Maybe he thought about the Thestrals or the flying Ford Anglia at some point and realized that it was actually possible for Harry to act on his mistaken idea that Sirius was being tortured. Or he may have assumed that Harry had contacted Sirius and found out the truth. Carol, wishing she could get inside Snape's mind From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Tue Nov 23 21:36:45 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2004 21:36:45 -0000 Subject: Too "Good" Harry / The resolution of Snape In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118435 Siriusly Snapey Susan wrote: > > I still *can* see Harry gritting his teeth & working w/ Snape in the > future, though -- but we're just different there, Lupinlore. > > Now, I'm going to see if I can't get you to go back upthread to my > other question from the post you referenced here. Rather than having > Harry be too "martyr-like" with Snape, you said you would more prefer > to have Snape die *or* have Snape change. Do you have a vision for > how Snape might change in a believable way? [And not just Lupinlore - > - if *anyone* has ideas for this, I'd love to read them. It's be > exciting to contemplate, as I can't think up much on this myself.] > > Carol responds: Whatever Snape does, I think it's necessary for *Harry* to stop sweating the small stuff and concentrate on what's important: controlling his emotions, learning his subjects, and preparing for the upcoming battle with Voldemort. And Harry certainly needs to stop blaming Snape for Sirius's death, considering that Snape himself advised Sirius to stay home and wait for Dumbledore. It's not *his* fault that LV planted the vision or that Sirius went to the DoM or that Sirius was too busy baiting Bellatrix to recognize his own danger. Yes, he stopped the Occlumency lessons, but they weren't working anyway because Harry wanted his dream to continue. And that's only one reason among many why Sirius died that night. Snape could, however, resume the attempts he made in the Occlumency lessons (before Harry's unfortunate venture into the Pensieve) to control his anger and express approval when Harry (or Neville) does something right. (Not that I expect Neville to take NEWT potions, but you never know.) Snape could also start addressing Harry as "Mr. Potter" (as McGonagall does) in exchange for "Sir" or "Professor Snape." Small efforts at mutual respect, or the pretence of it, could lead to the real thing at some point. Eventually they're going to have to "recognize each other for what they really are," as DD says of Snape and Sirius in GoF. Snape may not be in a position to effect these changes in HBP, though. He's going to be dealing with some very unhappy and resentful Slytherins who (unfairly) blame Harry for their fathers' imprisonment in Azkaban, and at least two of those Slytherins (Draco and Theo Nott) are likely to be in NEWT Potions with Harry (assuming that Harry gets in, and I think he will). (Actually, we don't know yet how Theo feels about Harry, but that's a different topic.) It won't be in Snape's best interest, or the Order's, to change his tactics quite yet, if only because of Draco. We shall see. Carol From mgrantwich at yahoo.com Tue Nov 23 21:42:30 2004 From: mgrantwich at yahoo.com (Magda Grantwich) Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2004 13:42:30 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Harry at the Dursleys In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041123214230.20211.qmail@web53102.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 118436 > Alla: > Eh? I am not very comfortable with dividing abuse into degrees, but > I > said many times that much worse cases of abuse exist. > > My ONLY objection is considering Dursleys not abusive at all. FINE. The Dursleys are abusive. Now will you drop the subject? Magda (getting really annoyed - can you tell?) __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? The all-new My Yahoo! - Get yours free! http://my.yahoo.com From R.Vink2 at chello.nl Tue Nov 23 21:45:40 2004 From: R.Vink2 at chello.nl (Renee) Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2004 21:45:40 -0000 Subject: Two Wormtails was Re: Plot in OotP (wand confusion) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118437 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "pippin_999" wrote: > > > Renee: > Who Wormtail is and what exactly Snape knows are two different > mysteries. As you say, the first one is solved later in the books. > On the later, we can only speculate but it doesn't change the fact > that the first one is solved. (Pulling Occam's Razor again.) > > Pippin: > The trouble with Occam's razor in this context is that we're only > pretending that events in the Potterverse are related by cause > and effect. Renee: To avoid misunderstandings, are you saying that Occam's razor is inapplicable in a work of fiction ruled by a single person who can manipulate people and events in a way no one in the real world is able to do? If we are allowed to eliminate evidence at will, then Occam's razor can be used to prove anything. If we're not, then the case for two Wormtails and ESE!Lupin is immeasurably strengthened. Renee: Calling our subjective interpretation of a text *evidence* can also be used to prove anything. Wormtail II is such an interpretation, not evidence, so if I use Occam's razor - temporarily setting aside the interesting question whether this is a valid operation in a work of fiction - to eliminate him because I think he isn't necessary to explain the text, I'm not eliminating evidence, just a conclusion based on the text. Maybe we ought to agree on a definition of what constitutes evidence? > Renee: > ?? I don't see what harm it could do to tell James the spy went > under the name Wormtail. So he would have told Sirius. What > did DD think Sirius could do with this information? And if DD > suspected Sirius *before* Halloween 1981 (is this canon?) he > was criminally irresponsible anyway, to allow him to be the > Secret Keeper. And are you saying James & Sirius wouldn't have > suspected Peter if they'd been confronted with the name > Wormtail? > > Pippin: > It would be very important to Voldemort to know what information > about the DE's is reaching Dumbledore, since it would help him > discover which of his servants was a traitor. If Dumbledore did > share this information with James, perhaps he made James > promise not to tell anyone else. Renee: I'm glad you allow the possibility that Dumbledore shared his information with Voldemort's target. But if he could *make* James promise not to tell anyone - not even the man James trusted beyond his other friends - why not *make* James accept him as his Secret Keeper? Pippin: > It is canon according to McGonagall that Dumbledore was > worried about James's choice of secret-keeper, and that James > insisted on using Sirius despite this. I don't think Sirius knew > about the Wormtail name. But if James did, and thought that > Dumbledore had eliminated Peter from consideration as the > spy, then he would think that Peter was the ideal secret-keeper, > since Voldemort would never think they'd use someone he'd > managed to cast suspicion on. Renee: Why would Dumbledore think it was a setup on Voldemort's part? For all he knew, his spy in Voldemort's camp (Snape) had handed him a genuine piece of information. So, if he passed the name Wormtail on to James, who likewise had no reason to distrust the information, Peter was no longer a likely candidate for the Secret Keeper job. Pippin: > It might have worked, only, IMO, somebody told Voldemort about > the switch. Renee: Uh, yes, and not just in your opinion... what about Peter? From mgrantwich at yahoo.com Tue Nov 23 21:46:58 2004 From: mgrantwich at yahoo.com (Magda Grantwich) Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2004 13:46:58 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Two Wormtails was Re: Plot in OotP (wand confusion) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041123214658.48510.qmail@web53103.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 118438 --- justcarol67 wrote: > Carol responds: > It was James who > insisted on Sirius despite Dumbledore's objections and Sirius who > insisted on Peter, a change that DD apparently didn't know about. > There's no criminal irresponsibility involved since he had no > control > over the situation. He no longer had the authority to "allow" or > forbid MWPP or Lily to do anything. They were out of school and of > age to make their own decisions, right or wrong. > > Carol Well, Dumbledore was the head of the Order and by becoming members of the Order, the Potters and Sirius had at least tacitly agreed to follow his lead, if not his actual orders. One of my concerns about the whole SK business was how Sirius and (apparently) James didn't realize how it affected everyone else as well. By joining the Order, they should have realized that their "private" lives weren't quite their own anymore. Magda __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Tue Nov 23 21:48:40 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2004 21:48:40 -0000 Subject: Too "Good" Harry / The resolution of Snape In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118439 > Carol responds: Whatever Snape does, I think it's necessary for *Harry* to stop sweating the small stuff and concentrate on what's important: controlling his emotions, learning his subjects, and preparing for the upcoming battle with Voldemort. Alla: Reluctantly, VERY reluctantly, I would agree that dealing with Snape IS small stuff in comparison to what Harry has to do in the future - namely stop Voldemort. IF there was no Vodemort in the picture (yes, I know then we would have no story), I would argue that Harry has to deal with Snape right away, because without threat of Dark Lord hanging over Harry's head and all WW, Snape IS everyday evil, which Harry faces on the regular basis( not that I am saying that Snape is evil, mind you, just some of his actions are, IMO) Carol: And Harry certainly needs to stop blaming Snape for Sirius's death, considering that Snape himself advised Sirius to stay home and wait for Dumbledore. Alla: He will stop blaming Snape, in his own time, I am sure. Carol: Yes, he stopped the Occlumency lessons, but they weren't working anyway because Harry wanted his dream to continue. Alla: OR, they weren't working because Snape was not a suitable teacher for these lessons.;) From mgrantwich at yahoo.com Tue Nov 23 21:49:36 2004 From: mgrantwich at yahoo.com (Magda Grantwich) Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2004 13:49:36 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Harry at the Dursleys In-Reply-To: <20041123214230.20211.qmail@web53102.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041123214936.72303.qmail@web53110.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 118440 > Magda (getting really annoyed - can you tell?) > I apologize to the list for my outburst. I've had a very stressful couple of weeks at the office - no excuse but hopefully a small mitigating factor. Magda __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? The all-new My Yahoo! - Get yours free! http://my.yahoo.com From R.Vink2 at chello.nl Tue Nov 23 21:52:17 2004 From: R.Vink2 at chello.nl (Renee) Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2004 21:52:17 -0000 Subject: Two Wormtails was Re: Plot in OotP (wand confusion) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118441 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" wrote: > > Renee wrote: > > I don't see what harm it could do to tell James the spy went > > under the name Wormtail. So he would have told Sirius. What did DD > > think Sirius could do with this information? And if DD suspected > > Sirius *before* Halloween 1981 (is this canon?) he was criminally > > irresponsible anyway, to allow him to be the Secret Keeper. > > And are you saying James & Sirius wouldn't have suspected Peter if > > they'd been confronted with the name Wormtail? > > Carol responds: > All we know is that Dumbledore suspected that someone close to James > was the spy and he offered himself as Secret Keeper. It was James who > insisted on Sirius despite Dumbledore's objections and Sirius who > insisted on Peter, a change that DD apparently didn't know about. > There's no criminal irresponsibility involved since he had no control > over the situation. He no longer had the authority to "allow" or > forbid MWPP or Lily to do anything. They were out of school and of age > to make their own decisions, right or wrong. > > Carol Renee: Oh, I agree. I was merely reacting to Pippin's suggestion that Dumbledore specifically suspected Sirius. If his suspicions were more general (as I believe, too), there was nothing he could have done, short of robbing James's friends of their freedom. Renee From nkafkafi at yahoo.com Tue Nov 23 22:11:23 2004 From: nkafkafi at yahoo.com (nkafkafi) Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2004 22:11:23 -0000 Subject: Two Wormtails was Re: Plot in OotP (wand confusion) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118442 > Pippin: > > In GoF, there was no mystery that was nicely solved by the > existence of two Barty's unless and until you had convinced > yourself that Moody was a fake. Neri: As I wrote upthread, there was such a mystery. It was "what was `Barty Crouch' in the map doing in Snape's office". This mystery was properly introduced to the readers (Harry, Ron, Hermione and Sirius all discussed it. I don't have the books with me so I can't pull the exact quotes). Yes, identifying fake!Moody was needed for the complete solution, but the `Barty Crouch' mystery was introduced to the reader regardless. The mystery of the Two Wormtails was never introduced to the reader, nor even hinted. > Pippin: > In PoA, there was no mystery that was nicely solved by Scabbers > being Peter, unless you were willing to consider that Sirius might > be innocent of betraying the secret, and Peter guilty. All the > evidence that Peter was Scabbers could have been explained in > other, more obvious ways -- until Peter was disenchanted. > Neri: There were many mysteries and clues in PoA, such as why Scabbers was ill, why does Crookshanks chase Scabbers, why does the sneakoscop start when Scabbers is around, Scabbers missing a toe and the only part left of Peter is his finger, etc. Yes, the solution to these mysteries involved Sirius being innocent. However, the proof we had to Sirius being guilty was actually very meager. It was only based on Fudge's report, and even Fudge wasn't a witness to the killing. Harry certainly wasn't a witness and we most certainly didn't have JKR saying "Correct!" when asked if Sirius killed the muggles. I must add here that personally, when first reading PoA, I knew almost from the beginning that Sirius was a dog animagus (the name "Sirius Black" was a dead giveaway) and I was sure he was innocent. I admit that there wasn't much of a detective work behind this. It was in part because the Dementors were so obviously the bad guys, so Sirius must have been the good guy, and also the fact that the book was called "the prisoner of Azkaban" and not "the murderer from Azkaban". Probably it was also my personal liking for dogs ;-) but I'm not surprised at all that JKR shares this liking. I also must confess that I thought Crookshanks was the other animagus, that I missed Lupin being a werewolf and that Scabbers!Peter got me completely by surprise. But the clues were there and the mystery (especially as I was sure Sirius was innocent) was there. In the case of Two Wormtails we have no clues, no mystery and no solution in canon. > Pippin: > Unless one is willing to consider that Lupin might be guilty and > Peter innocent of being the spy, there's little point in two > Wormtails, I agree. All the evidence can be explained in more > intuitive ways. But the evidence of Lupin's guilt is there, and > can't be entirely ruled out without invoking Flints. Neri: So here we come to the crux of it. The only plus to double!Wormtail is that it supports ESE!Lupin. But ESE!Lupin is in itself a theory, and not without problems. So instead of supporting a problematic theory with more canon you support with a more problematic theory. This is not merely going out on a limb, it is going out on a limb of a limb of a limb. I think the only reason you are still up there is that even gravity can't follow the intricate reasoning ;-) Neri From ginnysthe1 at yahoo.com Tue Nov 23 22:32:31 2004 From: ginnysthe1 at yahoo.com (ginnysthe1) Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2004 22:32:31 -0000 Subject: Purely evil In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118443 Khinterberg wrote: This quote has interested me for some time now. "Q. Tom Houseman asked, "Do you think that anyone in real life is truly wholly evil like Draco Malfoy and Voldemort?" A. Rowling said, "My instinct is to say that probably not, but I can't answer that question without ruining the series for you." Rowling said that in future books she will attempt to show "why Voldemort is who he is." [from the Star-Ledger, Newark, NJ 16 October 1999] Is she telling us that neither Voldemort nor Draco are completely evil? I like to think so, because it would make the plot and character development so interesting. I'm not a fan of black and white goodness and evil, and I like to think of this quote as showing us, the fans, that Jo doesn't either, even for her "evil" characters. Azriona responded: I kind of think it could go either way. I mean, if JKR said "Why, yes. There are people in life who are purely evil from Day One and that's that", then you'd have the possibility that Draco or Lucius or Voldy are pure evil. ... If you had JKR saying "No, no one can be pure evil" then you've got fans who say "Look! There's hope for those three yet!" Either way she answers, she's toast. Carol responded: The problem for me is in the wording of the question, which *assumes* that Draco (a boy of sixteen in the next book) is already purely evil like Voldemort. Admittedly, Tom Riddle was already purely evil at fifteen or sixteen, releasing a basilisk with the intention of killing Muggleborns, and at sixteen or seventeen, murdering his own family, but I don't put the bullying, badmouthing Draco in the same category--yet. He has yet to make the choices that Tom made, or even the decision to join the DEs. The question also relates to real life, but JKR has turned it around to relate to the books. I think she's leaving room for what we already know is her view: No one is born evil, not even descendants of Salazar Slytherin with the ability to speak Parseltongue programmed into their genes. Voldemort is partly the product of circumstances but mostly the product of his own wrong decisions. IMO, there was still some hope for his redemption even after he put the memory of himself into the diary to continue "Salazar Slytherin's noble work," but once he cast that first Unforgiveable Curse, murdering a parent or grandparent in cold blood, he was beyond redemption. It will be interesting to see whether JKR agrees with this view. As for real life, which is what the question actually relates to, I'm not sure whether she would consider someone like Saddam Hussein or Osama bin Laden wholly evil. (I do, but her politics and values don't always correspond with mine.) Kim now: I think I read in one of the books written about the series, probably The magical worlds of Harry Potter : a treasury of myths, legends, and fascinating facts, by David Colbert, that JKR doesn't believe in pure good or pure evil. Though maybe it was his interpretation of JKR and not based on a quote from her. But if it's true that that's how she feels, I suppose that it would apply to her view of real life as well as of the characters in her books. However, as Carol says, the question as Tom Houseman worded it seems to be implying ahead of time that Draco and Voldemort *are* wholly evil. But in JKR's answer it's not clear if "probably not" is to Draco and Voldemort being wholly evil or "probably not" to anyone in real life being wholly evil (or "probably not" to both possible aspects of the question). I agree though that she answered as she did so as to not give away the end of the series. Personally, I'm glad she's keeping it to herself. I'd like all her surprises to stay surprises! I think JKR's probable (and my own actual) view that no one in real life can be completely good or completely evil makes sense, partly because it allows the chance for redemption to anyone, even to someone who has behaved in a totally evil manner for most of their life. That view also follows the tenets of many religions, which appear to allow "sinners" of all kinds to evolve to the point, even very late in life, where they see the error of their ways and ask for forgiveness from the higher power and/or from those they have wronged. Of course, they have to mean it when they ask for it. No bluffing allowed. ;-) Then again, there's that sticky area, "point of view," that is, wholly evil *to whom*? It's amazing to realize that some people think a mass murderer like Bin Laden is good, but it's still a fact that there are clearly lots of people in the world who do. It's the problem with all fanatics unfortunately, that those on each opposing side see their side as all good and the other side as all evil. But I don't think real life is ever that black and white, and that's what makes fanaticism in real life so dangerous. FWIW, here's a wacky example of my point: I think my cat is good (not pure good, of course, she's a cat after all). But to a mouse, my cat is evil (at least that's my idea of what a mouse would think of my cat). So who's right, me or the mouse? Or are we both right? Then there's a question that's worth considering (IMO): Just what defines a *wholly* evil person? Someone who kills directly, once or many times, with cruel and evil intent? In that case, Voldemort is wholly evil. But perhaps only if you freeze his actions in time... What if he turns himself around (of course I don't think it's highly likely in his case, but it is possible) and gives up his evil crusade, will he still be *wholly* evil? Is a person wholly evil from the sum total of their life, a life which may have eventually turned from evil to good; or from the sum total of the *acts* in their life (that is, do the evil acts in their life cancel out the good acts)? And how about thoughtlessly killing large numbers of people indirectly? Is that as evil as killing one or more people intentionally and directly? Are there any limits to the personal or collective responsibility for evil acts? There are more spin-off questions from those, but my head is spinning too much right now... Cheers, Kim From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Tue Nov 23 22:40:09 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2004 22:40:09 -0000 Subject: Two Wormtails was Re: Plot in OotP (wand confusion) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118444 Pippin, quoting PoA: > > "Harry didn't understand what Snape was talking about. Nor, > apparently, did Lupin." > By now, you've realized that the line was a direct quote, not > commentary from me. It beautifully illustrates the unreliability of > our narrator, who is quite mistaken about what Lupin knows. The > full passage also illustrates unequivocally that Lupin is not > above equivocating. He says that the map looks like a > parchment that insults whoever writes on it, and that it looks like > a Zonko's product to him, when all the time he obviously knows > it's a map. So, can we really trust *anything* Lupin says that > sounds like it might be equivocal? I don't. > Khinterberg wrote: > But it surprises me how easily Snape lets one of the said > manufacturers have it back, although that could be due simply to > there being students around, and we wouldn't want them to > get too suspicious. Also though, I wonder why Lupin was so > surprised that Harry did not want to turn the map in straightaway. > Lupin was ateenager who helped write this map, he surely > knows how it feels to be young boy getting into mischief? Harry > has never been too concerned with a threat over his own life, at > thirteen years old I don't think keeping the map would have > bothered him at all. > > Pippin replied: > > Yes, this is the crux of the confusion. If Snape > 1)definitely knows that Lupin made the parchment > 2) has believed all along that Lupin is working with Sirius > 3) thinks that the parchment may contain instructions for getting > to Hogsmeade > > then it would be madness to let Lupin walk away with the map. > > Evidently Snape is not sure enough of his case to insist that the > parchment be taken to Dumbledore, and that makes me think > he's not quite sure who made it or what it does. > > Lupin wants Harry to see that if the map fell into Sirius's hands, it > could help him get into the castle, or so he says. The telling thing > is that after making a big deal of Harry's not turning it in, Lupin > also does not do so. > Renee wrote: > Who Wormtail is and what exactly Snape knows are two different > mysteries. As you say, the first one is solved later in the books. > On the later, we can only speculate but it doesn't change the fact > that the first one is solved. (Pulling Occam's Razor again.) > > Pippin responded: > The trouble with Occam's razor in this context is that we're only > pretending that events in the Potterverse are related by cause > and effect. Wielders of Occam's razor in the real world are not > allowed to argue, for example, that God obviously *meant* to > have the planets rotate around the Earth, and evidence to the > contrary is just a Flint. If we are allowed to eliminate evidence at > will, then Occam's razor can be used to prove anything. If we're > not, then the case for two Wormtails and ESE!Lupin is > immeasurably strengthened. > Carol responds: While I agree with almost everything you've said up to this point, including especially the observation on the unreliability of the narrator, I think you're overstating the case in this paragraph. All that is "strengthened" by the evidence you've cited (and reasonably interpreted) is the deduction that Lupin knows more than he's revealing to Harry--or to Dumbledore. Lupin knows quite well that Sirius can get into Hogwarts through the secret passages shown on the map, but to turn in the map to Dumbledore would be to confess that he's been concealing this knowledge, and more besides. But this interpretation, which I don't think can be disputed, does not lead inevitably to the conclusion that Lupin is ESE!, only that he's too weak to do what he knows to be the right thing. Just as he failed to perform his duties as a prefect in the Pensieve scene for fear of losing James's and Sirius's friendship, he fails to perform his duty as a teacher for fear of losing Dumbledore's trust by confessing what he knows or suspects about his former friend's knowledge and abilities. Ironically, his action *ought* to forfeit the very trust he's so concerned about because it proves that he is indeed untrustworthy. He is, in a sense, aiding and abetting a man he believes to be a murderer--exactly as Snape has suspected him of doing all along. Later we see him calmly acquiescing to Sirius's will, helping him to restore Peter to human form (no harm in that) but also intending to help him commit murder. IOW, he is willing to perform a spell that could send him to Azkaban and send Sirius to the Dementors just to prove his friendship to Sirius. There are serious flaws in his thinking, serious flaws in his priorities, but they don't make him a spy for Voldemort or a traitor to James. And they certainly don't lead to the conclusion that he's Wormtail II. Pippin wrote: > Exactly what Snape knows is relevant because it speaks to the > issue of how he learned of the nicknames and whether he > knows who they belong to. Remember that the whole plot in PoA > revolves around a case of mistaken identity. Everyone thinks that > Sirius was the secret-keeper and must have been the spy, > though he was neither. Now everyone thinks that Peter was the > secret-keeper which is self-evident. But it is not self-evident that > he must have been the spy just because the spy was known as > Wormtail. Carol responds: What Snape knows is relevant to the question of what happened in the so-called Prank and to what extent he brought the danger on himself. I don't see how it's relevant to the idea of a second Wormtail, which as far as I can tell grow solely out of your reading of the Cedric AK scene. (If Harry could fiddle with his wand to get it into the right position to Accio the portkey, Wormtail could adjust the bundle in his arms to AK a boy who had his wand out but wasn't expecting to be murdered. "Kill the spare!" is not sufficiently clear to convey that message to anyone except Wormtail.) Carol, who enjoys Pippin's arguments but thinks that in this case she's seeing what she wants to see From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Tue Nov 23 22:55:03 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2004 22:55:03 -0000 Subject: Timelines (Was: Is Petunia older or younger than Lily?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118445 Lexicon Steve wrote: > Thanks for pointing this out. We don't have exact dates for James, > Lily, etc. That's why there's a c. in front of the dates. In fact, > if you look at many of the dates, they appear twice or three times: > once as c. XXXX, noe as YX (XXXX), and then possibly as just XXXX. > That's because I wanted to be as accurate as possible. ONce is for > events which are approximate, one is for events which are relative > to other events, and one is for dates we are given specifically in > canon. > > How do we know when James etc. were born? There are a number of > references, but the most clear is Jo's recent statement that Sirius > was "about 22 years old" when he was sent to Azkaban. That means > that James and Lily were also about 22 years old when they died. We > can't say for sure how long it was between their deaths and Sirius's > being sent to Azakaban, so none of these dates are exact, but we can > get pretty darned close. > > Again, distrust the timelines all you like. Most of the errors have > been spotted and fixed, but there is always the possiblity of more > errors in something this complex. However, don't distrust it based > on a faulty understanding of how it's put together or where the > information comes from. Carol asks: I thought Sharon's(?) question was why someone born circa 1959 would go to Hogwarts circa 1971 rather than circa 1970. I share her confusion in this regard. If the person, whether Lily or Severus or Peter, was born between January 1 and August 31, 1959, he or she would turn 11 between January 1 and August 31, 1970, and would logically start school on September 1, 1970, rather than September 1, 1971. Only a student born between September 1, 1959, and August 31, 1960, would enter Hogwarts as a first-year in 1971. Please correct me if my math or my logic is wrong. I did check the dates in the Lexicon before asking this question. Thanks, Carol, who is not questioning your sources or distrusting the timeline, only wondering about the math From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Tue Nov 23 23:22:53 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2004 23:22:53 -0000 Subject: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118446 Claire Durina wrote: > Lupin was cowardly, James arrogant, Sirius vicious, but Wormtail was wicked, psycophantic, even sociopathic. He enjoyed watching others in pain. > > He wasn't strong enough to do it himself, but he was even more pleased by Snape's humiliation than the others. > > azriona responded: > Hold on. James and Sirius weren't wicked by actually starting the > torment? Lupin wasn't psychophantic by allowing them to do as they > wished, thereby silently condoning their actions? Sirius isn't > sociopathic by simply torturing another student simply because he's > *bored*?!? > > To say that Peter was psychophantic and sociopathic is stretching one moment in a lifetime to gargantuan proportions. > Carol responds: I think there's truth on both side of this argument, possibly somewhere between the two extremes. If we believe that Peter was the traitor as well as the SK, then it certainly did take more talent, power, and cunning than he is generally credited with to blow off his own finger, blow up the street killing twelve Muggles, escape into the sewers, and frame Sirius for the murders in the process. If he could do that, he could certainly AK Cedric in the graveyard while holding Babymort, Pippin to the contrary. He also had an advantage not available to the other (admittedly less motivated DEs) in finding Vapormort--he could converse with other small animals about the terror that was possessing their fellow creatures and follow the trail of corpses. OTOH, I can't see his looking at another student's exam answers as in any way defensible. Had he been caught, his test would have received a zero. His conduct in the Pensieve scene is no better and no worse than anyone else's. None of the Marauders comes off well in that scene, and "cowardly," "arrogant," and "vicious" pretty well some up three out of the four. "Wicked," I think, is a bit strong for Peter, but he certainly is a sycophant--almost but not quite worthy of Sirius's obvious contempt. But he was not yet a traitor and a murderer, and we have to wonder what pushed him in that direction. If it was simple fear, what was he doing in Gryffindor? Maybe, like Snape, he craved recognition? Maybe if he had been accepted on equal terms with the others, he would not have turned against them? Carol, wondering if "psychophant" is a portmanteau word combining "sycophant" and "psychopath" (If so, it fits the adult Peter perfectly) From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Tue Nov 23 23:39:02 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2004 23:39:02 -0000 Subject: The narrator again (Was: Harry at the Dursleys) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118447 Alla wrote: > > Harry is ALWAYS hungry at Dursleys, not just missing one meal or two. > When he eats, he describes in details what he is given and I don't > know, but to me it clearly does not seem to be enough, > Carol responds: Forgive me, Alla. I'm not picking on you, really! But Harry doesn't *describe* anything. It's the narrator who does so, from his point of view. If Harry were the narrator, looking back on his schooldays from the perspective of the still-young victor over Voldemort, we wouldn't need to worry whether he was going to survive Book 7. The use of a third-person narrator allows JKR to leave his survival in doubt (as well as serving other useful purposes). Carol, with apologies for ignoring your actual point, but I don't want to get into the abuse vs. neglect discussion From ginnysthe1 at yahoo.com Tue Nov 23 23:54:33 2004 From: ginnysthe1 at yahoo.com (ginnysthe1) Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2004 23:54:33 -0000 Subject: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118448 Clare Durina wrote: I have been feeling indignant at the popular characterization of James and Sirius as bullies and the twins as well. Being "cool" does not make one bad, and being enviably attractive or talented does not make one vindicive. I think that they were immature, carried-away boys. And while Sirius does have a mean streak, it just makes him a more complex and convincing character. (snip) Anyway, a bully picks on someone because he is weak and squashing him makes the bully feel stronger. Catkind replied: This is interesting. It seems to me that a lot of characters in the books display bullying behaviour of one sort or another. I'd agree with Clare's definition of bullying above up to a point: she says a bully picks on someone because he is weak. I think this is an oversimplification -- no one is perfect, and that includes the victims of bullying. There is often another reason as well. Maybe the bully wouldn't pick on the victim if they were not weak, but that doesn't mean the victim has to be sweet and virtuous. I'd say picking on someone who is weaker than you is still bullying. It seems to me that James and Sirius bully Snape, because they carry on tormenting him, and humiliating him publicly, when he is outnumbered and they are evidently stronger than him. If we try to excuse them we find ourselves saying things like, "he deserved it", which sounds rather like a classic bully's rationalisation. Umbridge and Snape bully Harry and his friends. George and Fred bully some rather unpleasant Slytherins. I'd even say that Harry and his friends "bully" Malfoy and co. on occasion -- leaving someone dripping from the luggage racks doesn't seem like justified retaliation to me, nor does Harry and a Weasley beating someone up in retaliation for mere jibes. They are obviously by far the stronger party. And what about Harry's taunting Malfoy about his father? Malfoy is of course himself a bully, although usually more the verbal than the physical kind. Of course, most of these characters have many other sides to their personalities (well, maybe not Umbridge and Malfoy). It would seem highly biased to label Sirius, say, as a bully, and write him off as that. On the other hand, the fact that he is a complex character and "cool" does not change the fact that he was acting as a bully. Dare I say, many teenagers do, at one point or another. Kim adds: I think Catkind is right that a lot of characters in HP (as well as people in the real world) behave as "bullies" at times. But the way I see it is that some of them are bigger bullies than others, and that it also depends on the circumstances where the "bullying" occurs. Sometimes the bullying comes from wanting to get even, as when the "good" kids cocooned Malfoy, Crabbe, et al. in the luggage racks. I'm not saying that makes it right either. And sometimes it's purely as a result of the bully wanting to punish someone for being something the bully doesn't approve of. Usually in that case it's because the bully is feeling insecure him or herself, but choses to punish another person for that insecurity. They could chose anyone perhaps, but it's usually a weaker person or a person who's already unpopular for some reason, so the victim has no one else to rely on to fight off the bully. with them. What I saw in the scene by the lake where Sirius and James bully Snape was that two teenage boys (Sirius and James) were picking on another teenage boy (Snape) at that particular time for a particular reason, and that that reason, as Catkind suggests, is not completely clear. Nevertheless in that instance I think Sirius and James were very definitely in the wrong. Why? Because Snape was apparently minding his own business at the time and the two Marauders were bored (Sirius) and interested in impressing a girl (James wanting to impress Lily). And there's no good excuse for that. But what's missing by way of explanation in the text is the reason they'd ever chosen to bully Snape at all. I mean, Snape was the butt of their bullying long before the scene by the lake took place. My sense is that years before that they had taken an immediate dislike to Snape due to his odd ways, his greasy hair, long nose, etc. And so in that first instance of dislike and their decision to act on it, they were also in the wrong. OK, maybe Snape was understandably hard to like, but in that case they should have just left him alone. On the other hand, Snape's bullying behavior may have begun at first as retaliation for the nasty way Sirius and James had treated him for being ugly, odd, greasy, etc. And so years went by and it just escalated every time they were in each other's vicinity. And Snape appears to have no crowd of his own to hang out with and support his side of the conflict. In any case, I've always objected to explaining away cruel behavior as "boys just being boys," which people often do. It seems like a pretty lame excuse to me. Kim From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Wed Nov 24 00:02:05 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 00:02:05 -0000 Subject: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118449 Clare Durina wrote: a bully picks on someone because he is weak and squashing him > > makes the bully feel stronger. > catkind responded: > It seems to me that James and Sirius bully Snape, because they carry > on tormenting him, and humiliating him publicly, when he is > outnumbered and they are evidently stronger than him. If we try to > excuse them we find ourselves saying things like, "he deserved it", > which sounds rather like a classic bully's rationalisation. Carol responds: I agree that "he deserved it" is rationalization, as is James's pathetic "because he exists." I also agree with catkind that James and Sirius were behaving as bullies in this instance, and probably in others if we accept Lily's assertion that James hexed anyone who annoyed him. But I'm not sure that the young Snape fits the description of a typical victim that Clare and catkind seem to agree on. In this particular instance, he was caught off-guard, attacked by two people at once, and publicly humiliated, and there's no question in my mind that he was an innocent victim. But that doesn't mean he was weak or that he was normally susceptible to such attacks. I don't think this is a typical encounter between Severus and James. Remember that Severus came to Hogwarts knowing more curses than most seventh-years. In a *fair* duel, he would have been a formidable opponent, as we can see by the cut he inflicts on James's cheek before Sirius robs him of his wand. I'll bet he would have given James a run for his money, and maybe James would have walked away from the battle a shade or two less arrogant. Assuming, that is, that the young Slytherin also fought fair--possibly not a safe assumption. Carol, wondering how Severus learned so many curses so young and what those curses were From mgrantwich at yahoo.com Wed Nov 24 00:21:41 2004 From: mgrantwich at yahoo.com (Magda Grantwich) Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2004 16:21:41 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] CHAPTER DISCUSSION: ch. 32 "Out of the Fire" In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041124002141.23060.qmail@web53110.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 118450 --- quigonginger wrote: > 6) What do you think of Snape's actions? He managed to warn Harry > that she had used veritaserum on him once, which should have put > Harry on his guard. He played up to Umbridge without being any > help > whatsoever. (And got in some delightfully snarky comments as well.) > > He saved Neville from choking with another snarky comment to > Crabbe. The message was truncated at this point (thanks, Yahoo!) but I think Snape did an excellent job of giving Harry a sign he'd understood his strange comment. He intervened to save a Gryffindor (Neville=Sirius) from a Slytherin (Crabbe=Voldemort). And by using Neville as the reason for his intervention, he ensured he'd get Harry's attention. I got the coded message as soon as I read it and laughed out loud. Magda __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Meet the all-new My Yahoo! - Try it today! http://my.yahoo.com From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Wed Nov 24 00:26:01 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 00:26:01 -0000 Subject: Harry at the Dursleys In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118451 > Alla wrote: > My ONLY objection is considering Dursleys not abusive at all. As to > those readings, well let me just say that I consider to be > PamperedPrince!Harry to be Dumbledore's paranoya anyway, IF > Dumbledore considered it to be a danger EVER. > > Am I being clear? The fact that Dumbledore may feel that he failed > Tom Riddle, does not give him a right to mistreat another kid, just > because Dumbledore afraid that this kid may go bad, BUT I don't > believe that this was the reason anyway, or I want to think so. > > Again, to ME the only reading, where Dumbledore is a good man who has > to make a difficult choice is where he wants to save Harry and > realises that he cannot do it any other way but leave the boy with > Dursleys Carol responds: I think you mean possibility, not fact, regarding DD and Tom Riddle since we still don't know much about their relationship or how Tom came to have a wand with Fawkes's feather in it. That aside, let's pretend that Dumbledore could have put Harry with a wizarding family without risking his safety and theirs. Why do you think that Pampered Prince!Harry is just Dumbledore's paranoia? Suppose that Harry had grown up as a celebrity, knowing that he had "defeated" Voldemort, treated as a hero just as if he had acted of his own volition--a toddler deliberately deflecting the Dark Lord's AK onto the caster. Wouldn't he have grown up at least as arrogant as James, who was only a Quidditch player and only became popular after his second year or so at Hogwarts (first-years don't normally play Quidditch)? We're given the example of Lockhart to show what hero worship can do to a wizard's ego. (We also have Snape making sure that something similar doesn't happen to Harry by exposing his ignorance of the WW to both Gryffindors and Slytherins on the very first day of Potions.) We do see Cedric handling hero worship well, but he's seventeen and has a calm and cheerful disposition (unlike Harry as we know him). Do you really think that it was unwise of Dumbledore to want to protect Harry from this sort of adulation before he was ready for it? Wouldn't he think he was special already and that, having "defeated" Voldemort as a baby, he could easily do so again without adequate preparation? How could a "pampered prince" endure so much as a "stupefy," much less a Crucio? Suppose there were no question of abuse or even neglect involved. Suppose it were a choice between Muggle relatives who would bring up Harry in ignorance of his celebrity status and an adoring wizard family that viewed him as a hero and gave him whatever he wanted because he was "the Boy Who Lived"? I don't think that even the Weasleys could have treated him as just another son, just a normal wizard kid who needed an ordinary wizard upbringing. Godric's Hollow would always come between him and normalcy. Forget the Dursleys for a moment and tell me how an upbringing in the WW, where every child knows his name, could possibly prepare him to face Voldemort in the years to come. (Anyone who agrees with Alla on this is welcome to respond. For that matter, so is anyone who agrees with me!) Carol, who thinks Dumbledore is right on this From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Wed Nov 24 00:40:21 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 00:40:21 -0000 Subject: Harry at the Dursleys In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118452 Alla wrote : "Harry is ALWAYS hungry at Dursleys, not just missing one meal or two. When he eats, he describes in details what he is given and I don't know, but to me it clearly does not seem to be enough," Del replies : In GoF, Dudley is on a diet, and Harry goes hungry because of it. As a result, he identifies with Sirius stuck in the cave. The narrator tells us that *after the last summer*, Harry knew what it was to be continually hungry (paraphrase). Logically, this would mean that Harry had never been continually hungry before. But I do believe that he was often hungry for no other reason than because the Dursleys didn't care to feed him properly, which is indeed a form of abuse. Del From mgrantwich at yahoo.com Wed Nov 24 00:46:25 2004 From: mgrantwich at yahoo.com (Magda Grantwich) Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2004 16:46:25 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Too "Good" Harry / The resolution of Snape In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041124004625.93673.qmail@web53104.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 118453 --- cubfanbudwoman wrote: > Rather than having Harry be too "martyr-like" with Snape, you said > you would more prefer > to have Snape die *or* have Snape change. Do you have a vision for > how Snape might change in a believable way? > > Siriusly Snapey Susan While I personally believe that Snape is going to snuff it in Book 7 (approximately 1/3-1/2 of the way through the book, I think), I could probably accept a personal change that would take place after the last battle, when the danger is finally past and the Dark Marks fade away completely from the arms of the DE and former DE surivors. It would be the end of a stress and tension that had lasted for years, and would leave Snape in a state of exhausted burn out. That I could buy, but not much else. Magda __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? The all-new My Yahoo! - Get yours free! http://my.yahoo.com From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Wed Nov 24 00:57:29 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 00:57:29 -0000 Subject: Two Wormtails was Re: Plot in OotP (wand confusion) In-Reply-To: <20041123214658.48510.qmail@web53103.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118454 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Magda Grantwich wrote: > > --- justcarol67 wrote: > > > Carol responds: > > It was James who > > insisted on Sirius despite Dumbledore's objections and Sirius who > > insisted on Peter, a change that DD apparently didn't know about. > > There's no criminal irresponsibility involved since he had no > > control > > over the situation. He no longer had the authority to "allow" or > > forbid MWPP or Lily to do anything. They were out of school and of > > age to make their own decisions, right or wrong. > > > > Carol > > Magda responded: > Well, Dumbledore was the head of the Order and by becoming members of > the Order, the Potters and Sirius had at least tacitly agreed to > follow his lead, if not his actual orders. One of my concerns about > the whole SK business was how Sirius and (apparently) James didn't > realize how it affected everyone else as well. By joining the Order, > they should have realized that their "private" lives weren't quite > their own anymore. Carol again: Well, true, and I did consider putting something about this in my original post. But in this instance, DD wasn't acting as the head of the Order. He wasn't sending the Potters out on a mission as he sends Sirius Black and Snape and various other people out on missions near the end of GoF. He was offering *himself* for the risky and dangerous position of Secret Keeper for the Potters, and it was James's right (and Lily's) to choose someone else. Dumbledore could not force himself on the Potters as their Secret Keeper, if only because someone else (presumably Lily) had to cast the Fidelius Charm. He couldn't cast it on himself, at least not without their leave. Nor would he have done so if he could, believing as he does in the importance of choice. All he could do was to warn James that one of his friends was about to betray him and that he had reason to believe it might be Sirius. James refused to believe evil of his best friend and left Dumbledore believing that Sirius would be the Secret Keeper. Unfortunately, he either didn't or couldn't inform him of the later change in plans. Carol From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Wed Nov 24 01:35:51 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 01:35:51 -0000 Subject: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118455 Kim wrote: > What I saw in the scene by the lake where Sirius and James bully Snape was that two teenage boys (Sirius and James) were picking on another teenage boy (Snape) at that particular time for a particular reason, and that that reason, as Catkind suggests, is not completely clear. Nevertheless in that instance I think Sirius and James were very definitely in the wrong. Why? Because Snape was apparently minding his own business at the time and the two Marauders were bored (Sirius) and interested in impressing a girl (James wanting to impress Lily). And there's no good excuse for that. Carol responds: This part I agree with completely. > Kim wrote: > But what's missing by way of explanation in the text is the reason > they'd ever chosen to bully Snape at all. I mean, Snape was the butt of their bullying long before the scene by the lake took place. My sense is that years before that they had taken an immediate dislike > to Snape due to his odd ways, his greasy hair, long nose, etc. And > so in that first instance of dislike and their decision to act on it, they were also in the wrong. OK, maybe Snape was understandably hard to like, but in that case they should have just left him alone. On the other hand, Snape's bullying behavior may have begun at first as retaliation for the nasty way Sirius and James had treated him for > being ugly, odd, greasy, etc. And so years went by and it just > escalated every time they were in each other's vicinity. And Snape > appears to have no crowd of his own to hang out with and support his > side of the conflict. In any case, I've always objected to > explaining away cruel behavior as "boys just being boys," which > people often do. It seems like a pretty lame excuse to me. Carol responds: Since we have almost no background for this time in their lives, we're all speculating at this point. I think that Sirius, for example,associated Severus with what he hated about his own home and family, which (for me) explains his vindictiveness. He may even have projected that hatred of the Dark Arts onto James as an explanation of why he disliked Severus. But James seems to be entertaining himself (and Sirius) by bullying Severus in the Pensieve scene. He dislikes him, certainly, but he doesn't seem to share Sirius's virulent hatred. At any rate, as I've noted in other posts, Severus is not the typical weak victim any more than James, however arrogant he may be, is a typical bully. He (Severus) could do some serious damage with his wand in a fair fight, and James undoubtedly knows that. In fact, it may be one reason he stopped hexing other people (those who merely annoyed him but couldn't fight back) but couldn't resist a fight with Severus, who in other circumstances might have been more a rival than an enemy. (If only he'd wash his hair and smile once in awhile and stop burying his nose in a book. . . .) Also, Severus *did* have his own gang of Slytherins, or rather he was part of a gang. The problem is, most of them, including Bellatrix Black and presumably Rodolphus Lestrange, seem to have been older than he was. If any of them remained at Hogwarts at the end of Severus's fifth year, they weren't much use as friends. Either they were afraid of James or they didn't want to publicly side with greasy, studious Severus against athlete James and handsome Sirius. I think, though, that Severus would have been reluctant to join the DEs later if any of his Slytherin gang (most if not all of whom became DEs) had betrayed or deserted him on this occasion. It makes more sense (to me) that they were all older and therefore absent when the Pensieve episode occurred. (FWIW, I think that Lucius (six years older than Severus) was the original leader of the Slytherin gang, followed by Bellatrix (three years older than Severus), and that the others were closer to their ages than to Severus's. The ages come from a news article in GoF and the "Noble and Ancient House of Black" chapter of OoP, respectively, if anyone is curious.) Carol, at a loss for a sign-off for this post From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Wed Nov 24 01:43:19 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 01:43:19 -0000 Subject: Harry at the Dursleys In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118456 Carol: > Suppose that Harry had grown up as a celebrity, knowing that he had > "defeated" Voldemort, treated as a hero just as if he had acted of his own volition--a toddler deliberately deflecting the Dark Lord's AK onto the caster. Wouldn't he have grown up at least as arrogant as James, who was only a Quidditch player and only became popular afterhis second year or so at Hogwarts (first-years don't normally play Quidditch)? Alla: We don't know that. We discussed ad nauseaum why Harry has enough "positive reason" to make good decisions - to share food with Ron on the train, etc. We are back to the question of free will and why Harry is basically a good child. If let's say the fact that he was loved the first year of his life protects him from reacting as abused child would to many things, than it is also reasonable to assume that he would not have become spoiled and arrogant, if he would grew up in WW. Moreover, why do you assume that Harry would be "spoiled" if he grew up in WW. He would be "loved" first of all and I think he is due a little bit of spoiling. I am sure there are families who would treat Harry as a child first of all, not as "boy who lived", I am sure such families could be found, if Dumbledore wanted to. I think I said earlier that I read "Dumbledore's" "not a pampered prince" as a regret that Harry did not grew up as normal child, that if Dumbledore could he would be happy to spoil Harry a little bit. Carol: Do you really think that it was unwise of Dumbledore to want to protect Harry from this sort of adulation before he was ready for it? Wouldn't he think he was special already and that, having "defeated"Voldemort as a baby, he could easily do so again without adequate preparation? How could a "pampered prince" endure so much as a "stupefy," much less a Crucio? Alla: Yes, actually, I do, because I don't consider placing child in the harm's way to be protection from another, "Potentially" dangerous situation. How Harry would grew up? We don't really know. It will depend ont he family he would be placed with and on his character, "free will" , etc. > Carol, who thinks Dumbledore is right on this Alla, who does not think that this was the reason for Dumbledore to do what he did, but if it was, thinks that he was very wrong on it. From steve at hp-lexicon.org Wed Nov 24 01:44:12 2004 From: steve at hp-lexicon.org (hp_lexicon) Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 01:44:12 -0000 Subject: Timelines (Was: Is Petunia older or younger than Lily?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118457 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" wrote: > Carol asks: > I thought Sharon's(?) question was why someone born circa 1959 would > go to Hogwarts circa 1971 rather than circa 1970. I share her > confusion in this regard. If the person, whether Lily or Severus or > Peter, was born between January 1 and August 31, 1959, he or she would > turn 11 between January 1 and August 31, 1970, and would logically > start school on September 1, 1970, rather than September 1, 1971. Only > a student born between September 1, 1959, and August 31, 1960, would > enter Hogwarts as a first-year in 1971. I understand your question, and I see the inconsistency. Although both are listed as approximate, and therefore both technically correct, it would be reasonable to approximate identically so it "worked out." To be honest, I always had James etc. born in circa 1960 on the timeline. I did the last major rewrite just after Rowling's statement that Sirius was about 22 when he was sent to Azkaban, so I adjusted the birth date down by a year to better take that into account. I never thought about changing the Hogwarts start date as well. I think the easiest way to fix it is to move the birth year for James etc. back to 1960. And of course, all those dates are still approximate. > Carol, who is not questioning your sources or distrusting the > timeline, only wondering about the math LOL You have every right to question both my sources and my timeline. And my math, obviously. Steve The Lexicon From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Wed Nov 24 02:12:41 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 02:12:41 -0000 Subject: The Vision : Harry wasn't sleeping Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118458 I haven't been following very seriously what's been going on lately, and any search on that subject predictably brings up tons of posts unrelated to the matter of my post. So if it's already been discussed, could someone point me to the thread ? Thanks ! Here goes : when Harry has his vision of Sirius emprisoned in the DoM, during his History of Magic OWL, we have no real indication that he was sleeping. Sure we are told that Harry is very tired because he went to sleep very late (Astronomy OWL) and he spent the morning revising his History. But in the minutes before he has the vision, he's not falling asleep : he's concentrating on remembering what he read in Hermione's notes. The very last paragraph before the vision starts goes this way : "*Think*, he told himself, his face in his hands, while all around him quills scratched out never-ending answers and the sand trickled through the hour-glass at the front..." It doesn't seem obvious that Harry fell asleep after that. When Harry had his snake vision, he first had bits of dreams : those were unmistakable, because they made no sense. But here, Harry has no such dreams. One moment he's desperately concentrating on remembering what he read, and the next he's walking down the corridor, or so it seems. And what makes things even odder is that this is precisely the occurence when LV finally manages to get the whole vision through to Harry. He's had innumerable occasions before (pretty much every night), but he never managed. And yet this time, when Harry is apparently *not* sleeping, LV manages to take the boy through the whole vision. Does anyone have any explanation for that ? Del From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Wed Nov 24 02:35:16 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 02:35:16 -0000 Subject: Harry at the Dursleys In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118459 Alla wrote: > > I am sure there are families who would treat Harry as a child first > of all, not as "boy who lived", I am sure such families could be > found, if Dumbledore wanted to. > > I think I said earlier that I read "Dumbledore's" "not a pampered > prince" as a regret that Harry did not grew up as normal child, that > if Dumbledore could he would be happy to spoil Harry a little bit. > > Carol responds: I think that's a misreading. What Dumbledore actually says, after explainig why he placed Harry with his aunt instead of a Wizarding family that "would have been *honored* and delighted to raise [him] as a son" (OoP Am. ed. 835) (his priority, as you say, was to keep Harry alive,835), is "Five years ago, then, you arrived at Hogwarts, neither as happy nor as well-nourished as I would have liked, perhaps, yet alive and healthy. You were not a pampered little prince, but as normal a boy as I could have haoped under the circumstances. Thus far, my plan was working well" (837). As I see it, he's *glad* that Harry is not a pampered little prince, a condition he *contrasts* with Harry's normalcy. This attitude goes goes along with his remarks in SS/PS chapter 1 to McGonagall about raising him among Muggles so he won't know his own history before he's ready to handle it. McGonagall protests, "These people will never understand him! He'll be famous--a legend . . . there will be books written about Harry--every child in our world will know his name!" "Exactly," responds Dumbledore. "It would be enough to turn any boy's head. Famous before he can walk and talk! Famous for someting he won't even remember! Can't you see how much better off he'll be growing up away from all this until he's ready to take it?" (SS Am. ed. 13). Admittedly Dumbledore, being Dumbledore, isn't telling McGonagall the full truth, that he's placed a protective charm on the house so that his mother's sacrifice will continue to protect him via Petunia, but it's nevertheless *a* reason, one of his considerations though not the main one. And McGonagall reluctantly agrees that it's valid. I happen to agree that whether the wizarding family loved him for himself or not, they would have ended up worshipping him and showing him off and all the other children would point at him and want to be part of his gang. Very bad for the ego; very hard to deal with rationally. Think how hard it must have been for Prince William and Prince Harry to live anything like a normal life. And they weren't considered the saviors of their world as Harry was of his. Look how people bow to him in the street and compete with each other to shake his hand when he enters the Leaky Cauldron. Think how hard it would be not to develop a swelled head if he had been treated that way from the age of fifteen months. (Setting aside, of course, the distinct possibility that he wouldn't have reached his second birthday with the Death Eaters still at large.) I still say Dumbledore was right that such an upbringing would have been worse than being raised by Muggles, even with all the deprivations and occasional abuse. This way Harry will earn his celebrity status instead of having it handed to him. This way he will know his own worth--and his own weaknesses--instead of taking the one for granted and ignoring or denying the other. This way he will be able to fight Voldemort when the time comes rather than being snuffed out by him on the first encounter. Although this isn't a real argument, I think it's worth noting the perils of childhood celebrity in the RW. A significant number of child actors have turned to drugs or committed suicide. Harry the "pampered prince" wouldn't live to suffer a similar fate; he would simply fail to live up to his own and the WW's expectations, to the detriment of everyone except Voldemort. Carol, thinking that Lockhart was put in the second book to illustrate the perils of undeserved celebrity From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Wed Nov 24 02:44:03 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 02:44:03 -0000 Subject: Harry at the Dursleys In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118460 > Carol responds: I think that's a misreading. What Dumbledore actually says, after explainig why he placed Harry with his aunt instead of a Wizarding family that "would have been *honored* and delighted to raise [him] as a son" (OoP Am. ed. 835) (his priority, as you say, was to keep Harry alive,835), is "Five years ago, then, you arrived at Hogwarts, neither as happy nor as well-nourished as I would have liked, perhaps, yet alive and healthy. You were not a pampered little prince, but as normal a boy as I could have haoped under the circumstances. Thus far, my plan was working well" (837). As I see it, he's *glad* that Harry is not a pampered little prince, a condition he *contrasts* with Harry's normalcy. Alla: It is not a misreading, Carol, it is how I read this quote. It is one of the possible readings. As Lupinlore said earlier, we are missing the tone of Dumbledore's voice. I read "but as normal boy as I could have hoped under circumstances " as Dumbledore's regret about the fact that under those circimstances Harry could not have grown up as normal boy, who could be a little bit spoiled and loved. From stevejjen at earthlink.net Wed Nov 24 03:04:52 2004 From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese) Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 03:04:52 -0000 Subject: Veritaserum was Re: CHAPTER DISCUSSION: ch. 32 "Out of the Fire" In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118461 Carol: > As for Snape not deducing sooner that Harry had gone to the DoM, why > would he? Jen: Because it is Snape's second full-time job to suspect Harry will skirt the rules, wiggle out of very tight spaces and get whatever he wants in the end. Since we don't know exactly when Snape contacted the Order, or how long it took Snape to figure out Harry & Co. were gone, I'm willing to give Snape the benefit of the doubt. But I find it highly surprising Snape would give *Harry* the benefit of the doubt in that situation! Why would Snape waver from his belief that Harry can turn even the most catastrophic situations to his advantage? And Snape knows better than anyone that Draco & Co., even with Umbridge on their side, are no match for Harry & Co.!! He may have contacted the Order immediately after leaving Umbridge's office, but in any other situation, Snape's very next move would be to monitor Harry. Why slack off at this truly pivotal moment? Does it take that long to communicate with the Order? Or perhaps there was something else Snape had to attend to during the time he was absent from the scene, somthing related to his mission. Carol: He knew that Harry couldn't apparate from Hogwarts even if > he knew how. He also knew that Harry didn't have access to his broom. > He knew that Buckbeak was in Grimauld Place with Sirius. Maybe he > thought about the Thestrals or the flying Ford Anglia at some point > and realized that it was actually possible for Harry to act on his > mistaken idea that Sirius was being tortured. Or he may have assumed > that Harry had contacted Sirius and found out the truth. Jen: Yes, it must be something like that which kept Snape from tailing Harry. Although why Snape trusts Harry will 'stay put' in this instance defies logic. It's easier for me to believe Snape was busy with other crucial tasks. But no task could be more important than keeping the Prodigal Son safe, could it ;)? Jen, flippant but also truly perplexed by the actions of Dumbeldore's Second-In-Command here. From elsyee_h at yahoo.com Wed Nov 24 03:18:38 2004 From: elsyee_h at yahoo.com (Tammy) Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 03:18:38 -0000 Subject: The Vision : Harry wasn't sleeping In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118462 Del wrote: *major snipping* > And what makes things even odder is that this is precisely the > occurence when LV finally manages to get the whole vision through to > Harry. He's had innumerable occasions before (pretty much every > night), but he never managed. And yet this time, when Harry is > apparently *not* sleeping, LV manages to take the boy through the > whole vision. > > Does anyone have any explanation for that ? Tammy replies: I think it's partially as it is explained by Dumbledore, that Harry dreamt the vision before because LV was obsessed with getting the prophecy. Once LV realized the connection however, I think that LV kept "sending" the prophecy to Harry, hoping to entice him to wondering about the prophecy (as partially explained by one of the DEs, too lazy to look up which one at this point). I think it's a simple matter of LV sent the full vision when he was good and ready, and everything was set up for Harry. I don't think he would have tried it at night anyhow, as it would have been perhaps more difficult for Harry to verify that Sirius was indeed gone? I don't think that LV had a hard time getting the full vision to Harry prior to that incident, I think he just didn't want to. -Tammy From Lynx412 at AOL.com Wed Nov 24 03:37:53 2004 From: Lynx412 at AOL.com (Lynx412 at AOL.com) Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2004 22:37:53 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] Two Wormtails was Re: Plot in OotP (wand confusion) Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118463 In a message dated 11/23/2004 5:33:12 AM Eastern Standard Time, R.Vink2 at chello.nl writes: > Renee: > ?? I don't see what harm it could do to tell James the spy went > under the name Wormtail. So he would have told Sirius. What did DD > think Sirius could do with this information? And if DD suspected > Sirius *before* Halloween 1981 (is this canon?) he was criminally > irresponsible anyway, to allow him to be the Secret Keeper. > And are you saying James &Sirius wouldn't have suspected Peter if > they'd been confronted with the name Wormtail? Ah, but there's the rub. Just who *did* know the spy went under the name of Wormtail? I don't recall any canon that states that anyone did. There is canon that the DEs hid their identities, even from each other. All that was known at the time was that the informant was 'someone close to the Potters'. Dumbledore suspected one of their coterie, but had no idea who. If he had a name, even a nickname, he'd have found out. The man's a Legillimens, people. All he'd have had to do was mention the name and wait for the answer in their minds. What we do have is Sirius' statement that the DEs in Askaban cursed the spy's name and would have killed the 'double-crosser' if they could have found him. So, just who did know who the spy was? I suspect the Pensive Four. the ones who were making an active search for their master...and his betrayer, perhaps. I had a thought on that. We've debated many times as to why the Four went after the Longbottoms. Obviously they believed the Longbottoms knew something, but why? I suspect that they knew or had found out who the spy had been. If any one of the DEs could have tracked the name, assuming that ESE!Lupin is untrue, it would have been Bellatrix, who would have had access to her cousin's old stuff. So, they find out that Wormtail = Peter Pettigrew, and they go looking for clues as to what happened to their master by tracking him. so, how does this lead to the Longbottoms? Well, we've never, to my knowledge, learned Alice's maiden name. What if it was Pettigrew? What if Peter was her brother, and the Four went to the Longbottoms to find anything that Peter might have sent to or left with his sister? This explains the DEs in Askaban knowing who Wormtail was without requiring complex theories as to why DD didn't mention the name to the Potters. HE never heard it. His spy [Snape, perhaps] never mentioned the name to him. In fact, that makes it more likely that Snape was the one who leaked the fact that LV was after the Potters. Snape may well have known that Bella was a DE, and probably knew about Regulus. Given the relationship between Snape and Sirius, and the possibility that Snape knew the team's nicknames, though perhaps not knowing who was who, he accepted as a given that Sirius was a DE. Theory needs some work, of course, but I think it's a possibility. The Other Cheryl [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Wed Nov 24 03:44:46 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 03:44:46 -0000 Subject: Too "Good" Harry / The resolution of Snape In-Reply-To: <20041124004625.93673.qmail@web53104.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118464 SSSusan: > > Rather than having Harry be too "martyr-like" with Snape, > > [Lupinlore] said you would more prefer to have Snape die *or* > > have Snape change. Do you have a vision for how Snape might > > change in a believable way? Magda: > While I personally believe that Snape is going to snuff it in Book > 7 (approximately 1/3-1/2 of the way through the book, I think), I > could probably accept a personal change that would take place > after the last battle, when the danger is finally past and the > Dark Marks fade away completely from the arms of the DE and former > DE surivors. It would be the end of a stress and tension that had > lasted for years, and would leave Snape in a state of exhausted > burn out. That I could buy, but not much else. SSSusan again: So essentially, then, this change would happen way *after* the fact of Harry's needing to work alongside Snape, right? I ask because that's what I was getting at earlier in this thread: if it's required in the plot, HOW will Harry & Snape manage to work together? I've suggested Harry might have to grit his teeth & just ignore [Professor] Snape-the-Prick, whereas others have said this would be the wrong thing for Harry [no, for JKR, really] to do--that they'd prefer Snape either actually CHANGE somehow or that he die. So, while I understand what you're saying as a possible way of seeing Snape change in the end...I'm still curious about what could cause a change in Snape earlier than that--early enough to impact how he & Harry work together on Order business/VoldyWar preparations. Siriusly Snapey Susan From mpvillas at yahoo.co.uk Tue Nov 23 21:51:18 2004 From: mpvillas at yahoo.co.uk (wisteria053) Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2004 21:51:18 -0000 Subject: Cot or crib? (Re: Harry at the Dursleys) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118465 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" wrote: > Carol responds: > So a cot *is* what Americans call a crib (a child's bed with > slide down railings). The portable baby bed would be a bassinette, > or at least that's what it was called when I had occasion to think > about the matter. wisteria53 (UK with 3 children): Cots v cribs I never used the word crib - the portable one you're describing sounds like a carrycot or a Moses basket. From bob.oliver at cox.net Wed Nov 24 02:40:40 2004 From: bob.oliver at cox.net (lupinlore) Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 02:40:40 -0000 Subject: Too "Good" Harry / The resolution of Snape In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118466 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "dumbledore11214" wrote: > > > Alla: > > > Well, you were certainly not alone, enjoying Angry!Harry in OOP. > I also felt that it was long overdue. > But wouldn't you agree that despite being angry, Harry basically > stayed the same person? > Certainly. However, basically the same person is not the same as exactly the same person. I don't see Harry's angry spell as a temporary abberation, but as part of his overall character development. Thus, to have him simply return to "calm, gentle Harry" would be the same, from an emotional standpoint, as chopping off one of his arms then having him show up with both of them. > What I am trying to say is that his "goodness" is still within him, > he just temporarily did not display as much of it as he used to? As I said above, I do not see Harry's anger as a temporary aberration, but a part of his character arc. That is not to say that he will be as angry or angry in the same way in the next book, but I don't think it's realistic for him to go back to what he was. > > Harry IS expected to defeat Voldemort. How believable is that? What > I am trying to say that him trying to work with Snape is no less > believable than fifteen year old expecting single handedly kill > Voldy. Actually, I think it is less believable, considering what we know about Harry, his past, and his character arc to this point. Consider, would you find it believable for him to work effectively with Umbridge? Yet there are points in OOTP, even after the quill incident, where he lumps Umbridge and Snape together in his thoughts. It's a highly debatable point, I admit. I just think that I, as a reader, would find it too much. That's why I use the word (a strong word, and purely my own opinion) "insipid" for such a development. It would just be far too much in the way of sweetness and goodness to fit well in the story, and would strongly shake my ability to suspend disbelief, much as the issues about Harry and child abuse have already shaken that ability. I acknowledge that we are dealing here with preferences. In the end, I just am not interested in reading such a simplistic (and, purely IMO, unbelievable) morality tale as "Good Harry decides to selflessly make all the right choices that Voldemort and Snape did not, despite being abused by the Dursleys, persecuted by Voldemort, abandoned by Dumbledore, and harassed by Snape. He rises above nastiness and pettiness and revenge to show the way to doing what is right even when in isn't easy, foregoing retribution for his own suffering to better serve the good of wizardkind." As someone has already said, that just smacks too much of the type of thing you see on "family TV," not to mention Sunday School, and would leave me badly in need of an insulin injection (as well as with seven books to use for kindling the next time I build a fire). Lupinlore From bob.oliver at cox.net Wed Nov 24 02:53:35 2004 From: bob.oliver at cox.net (lupinlore) Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 02:53:35 -0000 Subject: Harry at the Dursleys / DD's feelings about it In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118467 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" wrote: > I still say Dumbledore was right that such an upbringing would > have been worse than being raised by Muggles, even with all the > deprivations and occasional abuse. This way Harry will earn his > celebrity status instead of having it handed to him. This way he > will know his own worth--and his own weaknesses--instead of taking > the one for granted and ignoring or denying the other. This way he > will be able to fight Voldemort when the time comes rather than > being snuffed out by him on the first encounter. Oh, dear. I think we need to be VERY careful with this type of thing. I know you aren't trying to justify child abuse, but still I find it VERY hard to swallow that there is ANY situation, barring the absolute dire necessity of survival, that would make this acceptable - - spoiled, pampered prince or not. And yes, even with the entire wizarding world on the line. Once again, I will point out that the key thing we are missing in that speech of Dumbledore's in OOTP is his tone of voice. Is he saying this sadly, bitterly, self-mockingly, in a matter-of-fact tone? We don't know, and the meaning changes quite a bit, depending. My own reading of it is that his tone was probably self- mocking, that is he was ridiculing his own excuses and half-truths. To bring in two quotes from JKR, she has said "Dumbledore is goodness" and "If Harry were related to Dumbledore he would not have had to live with the Dursleys." Now, I suppose we might say she is referring to a special case where Dumbledore could have raised Harry without spoiling him, but IMO she is trying to send a clear message that the *only* reason Harry ended up at the Dursleys was the protection, and the stuff about not turning his head was an excuse he was using to fend off Minerva (by the way, I'm not sure she agrees it's valid -- it seems to me more that she lapses into silence because she knows nothing she will say will change Dumbledore's mind). Lupinlore From bob.oliver at cox.net Wed Nov 24 03:05:37 2004 From: bob.oliver at cox.net (lupinlore) Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 03:05:37 -0000 Subject: "Pampered prince" real reason? / Re: Harry at the Dursleys In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118468 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" > > That aside, let's pretend that Dumbledore could have put Harry with > a wizarding family without risking his safety and theirs. Why do > you think that Pampered Prince!Harry is just Dumbledore's paranoia? Actually, I think we in the fandom tend to make far too much of the whole "pampered prince" theme. We have only two mentions of it by Dumbledore in canon. In the first (SS/PS) it is a throwaway line he gives to Minerva to deflect her objections, and may or may not represent any part of his real thinking and intentions (we certainly know he was withholding by far the bulk of the truth). The second is a line in OOTP where we do not know if he is being factual, defensive, sad, self-mocking, or whatever else. I personally am inclined to think that the first mention really was only an excuse he made up hurriedly. Although he probably did believe it would be better to shield Harry from premature fame, I don't think that played any part in his decision. The second mention, IMO, was probably said self-mockingly, as a way of ridiculing his own excuses -- especially to himself. Just my own readings and opinions, of course. But I will say in their defense that they are a way (not perhaps the only way) to square all this with JKR's "epitome of goodness" remarks. Lupinlore From jlnbtr at yahoo.com Wed Nov 24 03:36:56 2004 From: jlnbtr at yahoo.com (jlnbtr) Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 03:36:56 -0000 Subject: Hermione getting to the Burrow In-Reply-To: <20041122213523.72745.qmail@web53106.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118469 On a previous post I wrote the bellow message and nobody abswer my main question: How does Hermione gets to The Burrow every summer? Juli wrote: > > I was driving to work and a thought came to my mind, > how does Hermione goes to The Burrow and other magical > places? At Christmas in OoP Hermione arrives at 12 GP > by the Night Bus, that we know, we also know that on > CoS she gets to Diagon Alley with her muggle parents > in muggle transport I guess. But do her parents drive > her to the Burrow every summer? Or is her fireplace > connected to the Floo Network? Or a port-key (but made > by whom?). I laugh at loud thinking of it: her very > normal parents at the Burrow, Arthur showing them his > muggle's artifacts collection, they must think he's > crazy (just like Molly does). > From Lynx412 at AOL.com Wed Nov 24 04:31:40 2004 From: Lynx412 at AOL.com (Lynx412 at AOL.com) Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2004 23:31:40 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] Veritaserum was Re: CHAPTER DISCUSSION: ch. 32 "Out of th... Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118470 In a message dated 11/23/2004 4:21:33 PM Eastern Standard Time, justcarol67 at yahoo.com writes: > Potioncat wrote: > > >We know Snape told the Order twice. He verified that Black was > >safe. We don't know what his plan was to tell Harry that Black was > >safe. (Or even if he planned to tell him.) > > > >I think one possibility is that Snape had reason to think Umbridge, > >Harry's gang and Draco's gang were in Umbridge's office, when in > >fact Harry and co had made it into the forrest and Draco's gang were > >tied up in the office. > > Carol responds: > That makes sense and explains his "stalling." He would not know that > Harry, Hermione and Umbridge had gone into the forest until he rescued > Draco et al. and sorted out that mess (undoing hexes, sending Draco to > Madame Pomfrey if necessary, and getting the details from angry > Slytherins all talking at once. He would have consulted Dumbledore > first (otherwise he wouldn't know that DD was on his way to 12 > Grimauld Place) and then consulted the Order for the second time. > > My only question is how he found out that the Inquisitorial Squad was > tied up in Umbridge's office. Someone must have finally broken free > and gone to tell him. By that time, Harry and friends were already at > the DoM and probably in the middle of their fight with the DEs. > > As for Snape not deducing sooner that Harry had gone to the DoM, why > would he? He knew that Harry couldn't apparate from Hogwarts even if > he knew how. He also knew that Harry didn't have access to his broom. > He knew that Buckbeak was in Grimauld Place with Sirius. Maybe he > thought about the Thestrals or the flying Ford Anglia at some point > and realized that it was actually possible for Harry to act on his > mistaken idea that Sirius was being tortured. Or he may have assumed > that Harry had contacted Sirius and found out the truth. > Sigh, I'm not sure how much of that to snip. I think you're on the right track here. I suspect that Snape's 'delay' had a much more practical reason. Snape simply *could not* rescue Harry & company. Remember his position. He's now on probation, he's probably a double agent serving both the folks who want Harry at the Ministry and the folks who want him safe. So what can he do? He delivers his message and stays away! He has an excuse for the DEs, Umbridge blocked him, and he can enjoy the thought of that little Peeping Tom suffering a bit. He has, at this point, no idea how badly DU wants to stop Harry. He has no way of knowing DU sent those Dementors, he has no way of knowing she's going to threaten Harry with an Unforgivable. He doesn't even know about the quill! Why should he act? he doesn't know they're gone until he finally finds an excuse to go to DUs office and finds Malfoy & crew and hears their story. he takes a quick look in the forest, realizes it's hopeless and contacts DD & the order, snarkily [because he's Snape] telling Padfoot to stay at headquarters, maybe with an 'this is all your fault anyway' thrown in for good measure. And the stage is set... Cheryl [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From snow15145 at yahoo.com Wed Nov 24 04:43:40 2004 From: snow15145 at yahoo.com (snow15145) Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 04:43:40 -0000 Subject: Plot in OotP (wand confusion) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118471 Snow (me) replying to Renee: I don't think it is just a question of how heavy or awkward the bundle is to hold with a wand at the ready but more so the suspicious circumstances surrounding this particular instance. Harry and Cedric are 6 feet from where this cloaked person stops next to a marble headstone when, conveniently for the scene, Harry's scar attacks him to the point of blindness so Harry nor the readers see who it is that attacked Cedric for certain. The next reference, although we know that the cloaked figure holding the bundle had been but six feet in front of them, Harry now hears a high cold voice coming from `far away' above his head. Next Harry hears a swishing noise and a second voice not directly identified as the voice of Wormtail, but we have learned to assume it to be, saying the AK spell. Harry resumes his sight to find Cedric's dead body next to him and the cloaked figure pulling him towards `the' marble headstone that had been spoken of previous as to where the cloaked figure had stopped. Harry was tied to the marble headstone by the cloaked figure, that he now realizes is Pettigrew, and could not see anything that is directly in front of him. Harry has a limited view of the whole picture throughout and as he is the narrator of the scene has therefore blindfolded the reader along with him. When these artful tactics occur, I personally tend to be very suspicious. Carol notes: I didn't snip your second paragraph as I hate it when my own ideas are lost through oversnipping, but I'm really only responding to the last sentence. Snow: Thank you for your consideration in snipping, I, myself am guilty of under-snipping, at times, in an attempt to adhere to the policies of the site and you are right a lot can be lost in translation when your message is not properly snipped, the actual subject point can be lost in translation, which in this case, by you, was not. Carol: As I said just now in another post and have explained in great detail elsewhere, Harry is not the narrator. This series is not a first-person narrative but a third-person narrative with a limited omniscient and not always reliable narrator who sees (usually) from Harry's perspective. If the narrator were Harry, he would use "I," not "he." Snow: I believe you are absolutely correct that Harry is not the `actual' narrator Carol: You are certainly right, however, that Harry's perspective, though voiced by the third-person narrator rather than by Harry himself, limits our knowledge and occasionally distorts it. Snow: Thank You! This is the reasoning behind why I replied to Renee's post! It is not so much the theory itself that interested me but the logistics behind it. Carol: I think in this instance it's because JKR doesn't want Harry to actually see Cedric die and she wants him to associate the death with Voldemort (through the pain in his scar) rather than with Wormtail. I still don't buy the argument for two Wormtails (or any other conspiracy theory), but I certainly question the reliability of the narrator at many points. Snow: I defiantly question the reliability of the narrator and am as open minded as I can be to all observations. From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Wed Nov 24 05:06:31 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 05:06:31 -0000 Subject: Harry at the Dursleys In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118472 Carol earlier: > I think that's a misreading. What Dumbledore actually says, after > explainig why he placed Harry with his aunt instead of a Wizarding > family that "would have been *honored* and delighted to raise [him] > as a son" (OoP Am. ed. 835) (his priority, as you say, was to keep > Harry alive,835), is > "Five years ago, then, you arrived at Hogwarts, neither as happy nor > as well-nourished as I would have liked, perhaps, yet alive and > healthy. You were not a pampered little prince, but as normal a boy > as I could have haoped under the circumstances. Thus far, my plan was working well" (837). > As I see it, he's *glad* that Harry is not a pampered little prince, > a condition he *contrasts* with Harry's normalcy. > > > Alla responded: > > It is not a misreading, Carol, it is how I read this quote. It is > one of the possible readings. As Lupinlore said earlier, we are > missing the tone of Dumbledore's voice. > > I read "but as normal boy as I could have hoped under > circumstances " as Dumbledore's regret about the fact that under > those circimstances Harry could not have grown up as normal boy, who > could be a little bit spoiled and loved. Carol: Sigh. You're right. We're missing the tone of voice and it's possible to read it your way, but given the context that you snipped, I read it differently. for one thing, I don't think spoiled (or pampered) is the same thing as loved. Look at Dudley, for example. Carol, hoping that *someone* will go upthread and respond to the idea that Dumbledore was right about not raising Harry as a "pampered little prince" From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Wed Nov 24 05:46:39 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 05:46:39 -0000 Subject: Too "Good" Harry / The resolution of Snape In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118473 Siriusly Snapey Susan wrote: > So essentially, then, this change would happen way *after* the fact > of Harry's needing to work alongside Snape, right? I ask because > that's what I was getting at earlier in this thread: if it's > required in the plot, HOW will Harry & Snape manage to work > together? > > I've suggested Harry might have to grit his teeth & just ignore > [Professor] Snape-the-Prick, whereas others have said this would be > the wrong thing for Harry [no, for JKR, really] to do--that they'd > prefer Snape either actually CHANGE somehow or that he die. So, > while I understand what you're saying as a possible way of seeing > Snape change in the end...I'm still curious about what could cause a > change in Snape earlier than that--early enough to impact how he & > Harry work together on Order business/VoldyWar preparations. Carol responds: I've suggested a very gradual change for Book 6, working back toward the relationship that was starting to develop (on Snape's side) before Harry looked into the Pensieve. It would start with minor details like Snape calling Harry "Mr. Potter" and Harry calling Snape "Professor Snape" or "Sir." The prerequisite, of course, would be Harry's recognition that Snape isn't responsible for Sirius Black's death, and a lessening of the venomous anger Harry felt and showed in OoP--the influence of Voldy tampering with his mind without actually possessing him? That's what I'm hoping for, I almost said "expecting," in HBP, but I'm afraid JKR will disappoint me. If you're looking for something more drastic, what about this possibility? Draco, blaming Harry and Dumbledore and everyone associated with them--including Snape, whose role as an Order member he has, erm, ferreted out--joins the DEs. Snape no longer has any reason to conceal his loyalties from the Slytherins since he's been "outed," so he starts treating Harry fairly, with only an occasional sarcastic remark when his old dislike surfaces or Harry does something stupid. Harry simultaneously learns what Snape is doing for the Order and realizes that he really can trust Snape, so he starts trying to cooperate and treating him with respect. I don't think it will happen that way--for one thing, it's too early for them to form an open alliance if they're ever going to do so--but you wanted something that would cause an abrupt and obvious change in Snape and that's all I can think of, barring Snape saving Harry's life. Harry saving his life would make matters worse, not better. And again, the big events will happen in Book 7, not Book 6. The war is just getting started, and the deaths will involve expendable Weasleys (Bill or Charlie) or other minor characters. At any rate, I don't think Snape will "snuff it" early in Book 7, as Magda predicted, or even in the middle. He's such a key character, not to mention such an interesting one, and there are so many enigmas about him that JKR has yet to resolve, that I don't see how she could kill him off any earlier than the penultimate chapter, when he would bravely save Harry and die fully redeemed in the eyes of all but the most determined Snape haters. Or better yet, IMO, not die at all, and change only enough to show Harry that his loyalties do indeed lie with Dumbledore, the Order, and Harry himself. Carol, who thought Magda was a Snapefan but must have been mistaken :-( From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Wed Nov 24 05:56:51 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 05:56:51 -0000 Subject: Cot or crib? (Re: Harry at the Dursleys) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118474 Carol earlier: > > So a cot *is* what Americans call a crib (a child's bed with slide down railings). The portable baby bed would be a bassinette, or at least that's what it was called when I had occasion to think about the matter. > > > wisteria53 (UK with 3 children): Cots v cribs > I never used the word crib - the portable one you're describing > sounds like a carrycot or a Moses basket. Carol again: Anyone here familiar with nineteenth-century English poetry? Here's the beginning of Coleridge's "Aeolian Harp," where "cot" equals "cottage": My pensive Sara! thy soft cheek reclined Thus on mine arm, most soothing sweet it is To sit beside our Cot, our Cot o'ergrown With white-flower'd Jasmin, and the broad-leav'd Myrtle . . . . Picture Coleridge and his bride sitting beside a baby bed "o'ergrown" with flowers, and baby Harry lying or standing in his little cottage. Oh, the English language! Carol, who thinks "Moses basket" is a fine term for a bassinette, especially as it's readily intelligible to anyone with a smattering of biblical knowledge From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Wed Nov 24 06:10:37 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 06:10:37 -0000 Subject: Harry at the Dursleys / DD's feelings about it In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118475 Carol earlier: > > I still say Dumbledore was right that such an upbringing would have been worse than being raised by Muggles, even with all the deprivations and occasional abuse. This way Harry will earn his celebrity status instead of having it handed to him. This way he will know his own worth--and his own weaknesses--instead of taking the one for granted and ignoring or denying the other. This way he will be able to fight Voldemort when the time comes rather than being snuffed out by him on the first encounter. > > > Oh, dear. I think we need to be VERY careful with this type of > thing. I know you aren't trying to justify child abuse, but still I > find it VERY hard to swallow that there is ANY situation, barring the absolute dire necessity of survival, that would make this acceptable -- spoiled, pampered prince or not. And yes, even with the entire wizarding world on the line. > > Once again, I will point out that the key thing we are missing in > that speech of Dumbledore's in OOTP is his tone of voice. Is he > saying this sadly, bitterly, self-mockingly, in a matter-of-fact > tone? We don't know, and the meaning changes quite a bit, > depending. My own reading of it is that his tone was probably self- > mocking, that is he was ridiculing his own excuses and half-truths. > > To bring in two quotes from JKR, she has said "Dumbledore is > goodness" and "If Harry were related to Dumbledore he would not have > had to live with the Dursleys." Now, I suppose we might say she is > referring to a special case where Dumbledore could have raised Harry > without spoiling him, but IMO she is trying to send a clear message > that the *only* reason Harry ended up at the Dursleys was the > protection, and the stuff about not turning his head was an excuse he > was using to fend off Minerva (by the way, I'm not sure she agrees > it's valid -- it seems to me more that she lapses into silence > because she knows nothing she will say will change Dumbledore's mind). > Carol responds (briefly): All I'm trying to establish (and it's difficult when the only people who respond to my post are those interested in--I might almost say obsessed with--the Dursleys and child abuse) is that being brought up as a "pampered prince" would have been a very bad thing for Harry. I'm not talking about Dumbledore or his real motive, which we know to be Harry's survival. I'm talking about why growing up as a "pampered prince" would be bad for Harry. Let's leave the Dursleys and Dumbledore out of it and look only at that. Pampering is spoiling. Treating Harry as a hero would very likely inflate his ego. Those are the points I made and supported upthread and the ones I would like to see answered. Carol, hoping she won't have to go upthread to retrieve her unsnipped post From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Wed Nov 24 06:21:24 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 06:21:24 -0000 Subject: Hermione getting to the Burrow In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118476 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "jlnbtr" wrote: > > On a previous post I wrote the bellow message and nobody abswer my > main question: How does Hermione gets to The Burrow every summer? > > Juli wrote: > > > > I was driving to work and a thought came to my mind, > > how does Hermione goes to The Burrow and other magical > > places? At Christmas in OoP Hermione arrives at 12 GP > > by the Night Bus, that we know, we also know that on > > CoS she gets to Diagon Alley with her muggle parents > > in muggle transport I guess. But do her parents drive > > her to the Burrow every summer? Or is her fireplace > > connected to the Floo Network? Or a port-key (but made > > by whom?). I laugh at loud thinking of it: her very > > normal parents at the Burrow, Arthur showing them his > > muggle's artifacts collection, they must think he's > > crazy (just like Molly does). > > Carol responds: Since I know how it feels to have my posts go unanswered (or snipped down to the sign-off line), I'll take a stab at it. We don't know the answer, of course, because the narrator is telling the story from Harry's POV, not Hermione's, but I would guess that her family's house is not connected to the Floo network (that would probably violate MoM regulations), nor would the many Muggleborn students be issued portkeys. I'm guessing that her parents drive her to the Weasleys', since their home can be reached by a Muggle taxi (GoF). Or, if her parents are unavailable, she can flag down the Knight Bus. Of course, if she happens to be on the Continent when she's invited to the Burrrow, she'd probably have to grit her teeth and take a Muggle jet to get back to England. Who knows whether there's an equivalent to the Knight Bus in France? Carol, hoping this is a satisfactory response From R.Vink2 at chello.nl Wed Nov 24 09:10:47 2004 From: R.Vink2 at chello.nl (Renee) Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 09:10:47 -0000 Subject: Two Wormtails was Re: Plot in OotP (wand confusion) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118477 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Lynx412 at A... wrote: > In a message dated 11/23/2004 5:33:12 AM Eastern Standard Time, > R.Vink2 at c... writes: > > > Renee: > > ?? I don't see what harm it could do to tell James the spy went > > under the name Wormtail. So he would have told Sirius. What did DD > > think Sirius could do with this information? And if DD suspected > > Sirius *before* Halloween 1981 (is this canon?) he was criminally > > irresponsible anyway, to allow him to be the Secret Keeper. > > And are you saying James &Sirius wouldn't have suspected Peter if > > they'd been confronted with the name Wormtail? > > Ah, but there's the rub. Just who *did* know the spy went under the > name of Wormtail? I don't recall any canon that states that anyone did. There is > canon that the DEs hid their identities, even from each other. All that was > known at the time was that the informant was 'someone close to the Potters'. > Dumbledore suspected one of their coterie, but had no idea who. If he had a > name, even a nickname, he'd have found out. The man's a Legillimens, people. All > he'd have had to do was mention the name and wait for the answer in their > minds. Renee: If you look at message #118357, you'll see that's preciesely the point I'm making there. My comment was a reaction to Pippin's theory that Voldemort "used the code name Wormtail for his spy Lupin in Voldemort War One, in order to taunt James and mislead Dumbledore." (Pippin's message 118343) and that "Voldemort assumed that the name "Wormtail" would get back to James, but Dumbledore kept it to himself." (Pippin's message 118351.) In fact, I'm in complete agreement with you; I was just arguing that *if* Dumbledore would have known the name of the spy was Wormtail, he wouldn't have sat back and done nothing. Renee who begins to suspect it's risky to even briefly adopt Pippin's theories, if only for the sake of arguing against them :) From yutu75es at yahoo.es Wed Nov 24 10:49:03 2004 From: yutu75es at yahoo.es (fridwulfa hagrid) Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 11:49:03 +0100 Subject: Slighty OT but could be related to HP6 Message-ID: <004e01c4d213$38d37410$8000a8c0@casa> No: HPFGUIDX 118478 I just want to ask any of you who suscribed to Bloomsbury Harry Potter newsletters if you have received an email asking you to confirm you e-mail address. This morning I found I had an e.mail from them asking me to re-register so they could make sure the were reaching me at the right e-mail address. This is quite odd, I received a birthday card from them not so long ago, so I have a sneaky suspicion that they're anouncing the release of HP6 quite soon, and that's why they are updating their data base. I don't know, I might be wrong, but it's really a strange mail. Am I the only one who received such a request? Cheers Fridwulfa [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From cat_kind at yahoo.com Wed Nov 24 10:53:55 2004 From: cat_kind at yahoo.com (cat_kind) Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 10:53:55 -0000 Subject: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118479 > Clare Durina wrote: > a bully picks on someone because he is weak and squashing him > > > makes the bully feel stronger. > > Carol responds: (snip) > But I'm not sure that the young Snape fits the description of a > typical victim that Clare and catkind seem to agree on. In this > particular instance, he was caught off-guard, attacked by two people > at once, and publicly humiliated, and there's no question in my mind > that he was an innocent victim. But that doesn't mean he was weak or > that he was normally susceptible to such attacks. > (snip) Assuming, that is, that the young Slytherin also fought > fair--possibly not a safe assumption. catkind: I don't actually believe there is such a thing as a "typical" victim. But there has to be a difference between bullying and fighting, and in this instance James and Sirius together are clearly stronger than Snape alone, which seems to make it bullying. Whether Potter vs Snape would be a fair fight isn't clear - given that in the pensieve scene Snape pulls his wand first but still doesn't get a shot in, I'd think probably even James alone would be sufficiently much faster to squish him, from a standing start. (I don't really see the history of this enmity as consisting of gentlemanly duels though!) That Snape has malign intent is agreed. That he has some nasty hexes up his sleeve, agreed. He's not necessarily weak, but weaker in this case. I have the feeling both parties in this conflict think the other doesn't play fair - James detests Snape for his use of dark arts hexes and so on, and sees that Snape is really aiming to injure. Snape, on the other hand, probably thinks James is being unfair in using such humiliation tactics, and not letting it be a "fair fight". I bet he'd prefer to be hexed than have his underwear shown off. catkind From koukla_es at yahoo.es Wed Nov 24 11:07:57 2004 From: koukla_es at yahoo.es (neith_seshat) Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 11:07:57 -0000 Subject: Slighty OT but could be related to HP6 In-Reply-To: <004e01c4d213$38d37410$8000a8c0@casa> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118480 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "fridwulfa hagrid" wrote: > > > I just want to ask any of you who suscribed to Bloomsbury Harry Potter newsletters if you have received an email asking you to confirm you e-mail address. This morning I found I had an e.mail from them asking me to re-register so they could make sure the were reaching me at the right e-mail address. This is quite odd, I received a birthday card from them not so long ago, so I have a sneaky suspicion that they're anouncing the release of HP6 quite soon, and that's why they are updating their data base. I don't know, I might be wrong, but it's really a strange mail. Am I the only one who received such a request? > > Cheers > Fridwulfa Yes, I have received the same e-mail this morning. I agree it's really strange, but maybe they just want to protect themselves from viruses and other stuff. Let?s keep our fingers crossed! Neith From willsonkmom at msn.com Wed Nov 24 12:26:14 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 12:26:14 -0000 Subject: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118481 Catkind wrote: > Whether Potter vs Snape would be a fair fight isn't clear - given that > in the pensieve scene Snape pulls his wand first but still doesn't get > a shot in, I'd think probably even James alone would be sufficiently > much faster to squish him, from a standing start. (I don't really see > the history of this enmity as consisting of gentlemanly duels though!) Potioncat: Well, we've been told that James was a powerful wizard. And it seems that Snape is too. But I don't think this scene tells us how closely matched they are. Speed to the wand would only be meaningfull if they were standing at 10 paces and a third party yelled, "Draw!" James sees Severus, cues Sirius, stands up and calls out. He is prepared. Severus has to react, drop his bag and pull out his wand. By the time he has his wand, James is casting expelliarmus. As to a fair fight: James drops Severus to the ground, Severus jumps up with his wand ready and James throws a locomotor mortis. At Lily's command, James counters it and Snape stands up. Nothing is said about his wand. Lily tells James off making him mad and walks off and at that point, James jerks Severus back into the air and offers to take off his pants. Either Severus had his wand, but did not cast a curse while James and Lily were arguing, then James threw one without warning. (Was Severus the one fighting fair?) Or, Severus did not have his wand when he stood up and James threw a curse on an unarmed opponent without warning. Whatever many good things James will go on to do, at this particular time, he was a real jerk. > From azriona at juno.com Wed Nov 24 12:29:53 2004 From: azriona at juno.com (Sharon) Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 12:29:53 -0000 Subject: Timelines (Was: Is Petunia older or younger than Lily?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118482 Steve: To be honest, I always had James etc. born in circa > 1960 on the timeline. Ha! I knew I didn't dream that up.... Steve: I never thought about changing the Hogwarts start > date as well. I think the easiest way to fix it is to move the birth > year for James etc. back to 1960. And of course, all those dates are > still approximate. > Easier, yes, but I think 1959 is probably correct. At least, for Sirius, who may very well have been 22 at the beginning of November 1981, but still started Hogwarts shortly before his twelvth birthday in 1971. It's like the Hermione Granger question all over again. > > > Carol, who is not questioning your sources or distrusting the > > timeline, only wondering about the math > > LOL > You have every right to question both my sources and my timeline. > And my math, obviously. > > Steve > The Lexicon Although, honestly, it's not like you'd be the first to get confused on numbers and math, particularly when discussing HP characters and timelines. You *could* say that you come by it very honestly. *looks in general direction of Scotland* --az, who also goes by azriona, who also goes by Sharon, who also is very glad that Steve isn't upset with her to start with. From willsonkmom at msn.com Wed Nov 24 12:37:35 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 12:37:35 -0000 Subject: McGonagall and Snape a tad OT Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118483 Well, we've all wondered about the relationship between the Gryffindor Head of House and the Slytherin Head of House. Many of us think they have something between a grudging respect and a close friendship. (That was the canon part) I just read an interview with the actress who plays Ginny in GoF. Ginny and Neville will be dancing the tango at the Yule Ball. And so will Snape and McGonagall. I'd really like to see Snape and McGonagall doing the tango....perhaps on the deleted scene section of the GoF DVD. Potioncat (with apologies) From elsyee_h at yahoo.com Wed Nov 24 13:26:39 2004 From: elsyee_h at yahoo.com (Tammy) Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 13:26:39 -0000 Subject: Harry at the Dursleys In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118484 > Carol wrote: > I think that's a misreading. What Dumbledore actually says, after > explainig why he placed Harry with his aunt instead of a Wizarding > family that "would have been *honored* and delighted to raise [him] as > a son" (OoP Am. ed. 835) (his priority, as you say, was to keep Harry > alive,835), is > > "Five years ago, then, you arrived at Hogwarts, neither as happy nor > as well-nourished as I would have liked, perhaps, yet alive and > healthy. You were not a pampered little prince, but as normal a boy as > I could have haoped under the circumstances. Thus far, my plan was > working well" (837). > > As I see it, he's *glad* that Harry is not a pampered little prince, a > condition he *contrasts* with Harry's normalcy. This attitude goes > goes along with his remarks in SS/PS chapter 1 to McGonagall about > raising him among Muggles so he won't know his own history before he's > ready to handle it. > Tammy responds: I too see Dumbledore's comments as him being glad he's not a pampered little prince. Actually I think "pampered little prince" can actually be translated from Dumbledore's nice version to the not so nice "spoiled little brat", which is what I think Dumbledore meant, but is way too nice to use. The way I see it, Dumbledore was afraid that Harry would come out ending up like Lockhart or Draco, who are both spoiled and pampered brats. If Harry had been raised in a wizarding home, where the fame could change his personality and make him spoiled and pampered, would he then still be able to be the one to go out and kill LV as the prophecy seems to indicate? If you consider that Dumbledore knew the prophecy and probably read it as "Harry has to kill LV," then Dumbledore probably feared Harry going to a wizarding home where he would end up being spoiled and pampered, and not learning the harsh lessons he needed to learn. -Tammy From mgrantwich at yahoo.com Wed Nov 24 14:01:05 2004 From: mgrantwich at yahoo.com (Magda Grantwich) Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 06:01:05 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] "Pampered prince" real reason? / Re: Harry at the Dursleys In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041124140105.18488.qmail@web53102.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 118485 --- lupinlore wrote: > > Actually, I think we in the fandom tend to make far too much of the > whole "pampered prince" theme. We have only two mentions of it by > Dumbledore in canon. In the first (SS/PS) it is a throwaway line > he > gives to Minerva to deflect her objections, and may or may not > represent any part of his real thinking and intentions (we > certainly > know he was withholding by far the bulk of the truth). I disagree with this. It was not a throwaway line; it was a detailed paragraph, and he raised some valid points. I respectfully suggest that there's not as much difference between everyone's arguments as some posters seem to think. Harry had to be at the Dursleys because of the magical protection. This is not negotiable, however unfortunate it might be for Harry personally. Another effect of this situation is that Harry will not find out about his true heritage (and future task) until he's in an environment (Hogwarts, the WW) and with people (Dumbledore, other teachers) who can explain it/help him deal with it/prepare him to face it. Is there anyone out there that seriously disagrees with that paragraph as written? Because there are a lot of fine hairs being split on this issue. Magda __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - Helps protect you from nasty viruses. http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From mgrantwich at yahoo.com Wed Nov 24 14:07:52 2004 From: mgrantwich at yahoo.com (Magda Grantwich) Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 06:07:52 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] McGonagall and Snape a tad OT In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041124140752.68525.qmail@web53101.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 118486 --- potioncat wrote: > I just read an interview with the actress who plays Ginny in GoF. > Ginny and Neville will be dancing the tango at the Yule Ball. And > so will Snape and McGonagall. > > I'd really like to see Snape and McGonagall doing the > tango....perhaps on the deleted scene section of the GoF DVD. PLOT ATROCITY!!!!! RUN FOR YOUR LIVES!!!!!! *sigh* Damned scriptwriters. They'd better include Snape blasting the rose bushes apart - that is one of my favourite moments in the entire series. Although they probably won't - the prats. Magda __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - You care about security. So do we. http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From mgrantwich at yahoo.com Wed Nov 24 14:12:58 2004 From: mgrantwich at yahoo.com (Magda Grantwich) Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 06:12:58 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Harry at the Dursleys / DD's feelings about it In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041124141258.55971.qmail@web53108.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 118487 > > Carol responds (briefly): > All I'm trying to establish (and it's difficult when the only > people > who respond to my post are those interested in--I might almost say > obsessed with--the Dursleys and child abuse) is that being brought > up > as a "pampered prince" would have been a very bad thing for Harry. > I'm > not talking about Dumbledore or his real motive, which we know to > be > Harry's survival. I'm talking about why growing up as a "pampered > prince" would be bad for Harry. Let's leave the Dursleys and > Dumbledore out of it and look only at that. > > Pampering is spoiling. Treating Harry as a hero would very likely > inflate his ego. Those are the points I made and supported upthread > and the ones I would like to see answered. > > Carol, hoping she won't have to go upthread to retrieve her > unsnipped post I totally, completely, absolutely, 100% agree with Carol. Magda __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Take Yahoo! Mail with you! Get it on your mobile phone. http://mobile.yahoo.com/maildemo From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Wed Nov 24 14:23:06 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 14:23:06 -0000 Subject: McGonagall and Snape a tad OT In-Reply-To: <20041124140752.68525.qmail@web53101.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118488 potioncat wrote: > > I just read an interview with the actress who plays Ginny in > > GoF. Ginny and Neville will be dancing the tango at the Yule > > Ball. And so will Snape and McGonagall. > > > > I'd really like to see Snape and McGonagall doing the > > tango....perhaps on the deleted scene section of the GoF DVD. Magda: > PLOT ATROCITY!!!!! RUN FOR YOUR LIVES!!!!!! > > *sigh* Damned scriptwriters. > SSSusan: It's also interesting to note that the interview w/ Bonnie Wright which can be found at The Leaky Cauldron also now has the references to Snape & McGonagall doing the tango *removed.* A tangoing Snape fits Rickman!Snape, but it sure as heck doesn't fit canon!Snape... at least not outside the staff room. ;-) Siriusly Snapey Susan From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Wed Nov 24 14:19:46 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 14:19:46 -0000 Subject: Harry at the Dursleys In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118489 Carol wrote: > > What Dumbledore actually says, after explainig why he placed > > Harry with his aunt instead of a Wizarding family that "would > > have been *honored* and delighted to raise [him] as a son" (OoP > > Am. ed. 835) (his priority, as you say, was to keep Harry > > alive,835), is > > > > "Five years ago, then, you arrived at Hogwarts, neither as happy > > nor as well-nourished as I would have liked, perhaps, yet alive > > and healthy. You were not a pampered little prince, but as normal > > a boy asI could have hoped under the circumstances. Thus far, my > > plan was working well" (837). > > > > As I see it, he's *glad* that Harry is not a pampered little > > prince.... Tammy responds: > I too see Dumbledore's comments as him being glad he's not a > pampered little prince. Actually I think "pampered little prince" > can actually be translated from Dumbledore's nice version to the > not so nice "spoiled little brat", which is what I think Dumbledore > meant, but is way too nice to use. > > The way I see it, Dumbledore was afraid that Harry would come out > ending up like Lockhart or Draco, who are both spoiled and pampered > brats. > > If Harry had been raised in a wizarding home, where the fame could > change his personality and make him spoiled and pampered, would he > then still be able to be the one to go out and kill LV as the > prophecy seems to indicate? If you consider that Dumbledore knew > the prophecy and probably read it as "Harry has to kill LV," then > Dumbledore probably feared Harry going to a wizarding home where he > would end up being spoiled and pampered, and not learning the harsh > lessons he needed to learn. SSSusan: While I agree w/ this assessment of what DD was likely thinking regarding the "pampered little prince" & placing Harry w/ the Dursleys...and have, in fact quite recently, defended that action... I must confess that something just struck me. Perhaps it was Tammy's mentioning "like Draco". Tammy argued that DD was thinking about the prophecy when he decided Harry should be kept out of the WW because he was thinking about Harry's having to kill Voldy someday, and he wanted a child who would be most able to do that, hence, *not* a spoiled, pampered, egotistical, puffed up brat. I've thought this was part of it, too-- along w/ DD's believing that the only truly *safe* place for Harry was w/ his blood relative. [Alas, not totally safe, as it turns out, but safe from Voldy & his henchmen.] But what struck me just now was that by leaving Harry in the Muggle World, with no indication that he's magical, while this likely ensures the no pampered prince part of the equation, DD's also ensuring that young Harry will *not* be doing what Draco [and other WW kids such as the Weasleys] are likely doing--learning magic! If Harry's going to have to be skilled enough to defeat Voldy at some undetermined date in the future, it's an interesting call to *remove* Harry from any opportunity to learn any kind of magic at all until age 11. Was that an awfully big gamble that it would take Voldy at least that long to return? Was it more important that Harry not be a pampered little prince than that he get the chance to learn some magic? Or does this simply point to the notion that the *main* reason for placing Harry w/ the Dursleys was his protection? Siriusly Snapey Susan, who's fully aware that some people would add the question "Or does this mean DD's ESE?" but I won't go there. :-) From bob.oliver at cox.net Wed Nov 24 14:16:58 2004 From: bob.oliver at cox.net (lupinlore) Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 14:16:58 -0000 Subject: Harry at the Dursleys / DD's feelings about it In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118490 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" wrote: > > > > Carol responds (briefly): > All I'm trying to establish (and it's difficult when the only people > who respond to my post are those interested in--I might almost say > obsessed with--the Dursleys and child abuse) is that being brought up > as a "pampered prince" would have been a very bad thing for Harry. I'm > not talking about Dumbledore or his real motive, which we know to be > Harry's survival. I'm talking about why growing up as a "pampered > prince" would be bad for Harry. Let's leave the Dursleys and > Dumbledore out of it and look only at that. > Very well. In the *abstract*, Harry is better off not being a "pampered prince" or, if you like, a spoiled brat. I don't think that is in any way controversial. Nor do I think Alla is arguing that Harry would have been better off as a spoiled brat. Rather she is trying to say that all children in normal homes are pampered, i.e. lovingly indulged, at times and to an extent, and Harry would have been better off being "spoiled" *to that extent.* We might use the Weasleys as an example. However, we are not presented with this issue in the abstract. *In the story*, that is accomplished through the medium of the Dursleys who are, yes, child abusers. Within the context of the story, the two issues are *not* separate. Now, I also agree, to get back to Dumbledore, that he might be trying to salvage all the good he can from a terrible situation. That is, in OOTP he might have been trying to say "Well, you were alive and you were a pretty normal kid, not a spoiled brat, and those are the only two things I can find good about this horrible situation." If that is indeed what he meant, I just wish he had come out and said it, rather than using the cryptic circumlocutions he employs. Lupinlore From cyclone_61032 at yahoo.com Wed Nov 24 12:20:31 2004 From: cyclone_61032 at yahoo.com (David & Laura) Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 12:20:31 -0000 Subject: Harry at the Dursleys In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118491 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" wrote: > > Carol earlier: > > I think that's a misreading. What Dumbledore actually says, after > > explainig why he placed Harry with his aunt instead of a Wizarding > > family that "would have been *honored* and delighted to raise [him] > > as a son" (OoP Am. ed. 835) (his priority, as you say, was to keep > > Harry alive,835), is > > "Five years ago, then, you arrived at Hogwarts, neither as happy nor > > as well-nourished as I would have liked, perhaps, yet alive and > > healthy. You were not a pampered little prince, but as normal a boy > > as I could have haoped under the circumstances. Thus far, my plan > was working well" (837). > > As I see it, he's *glad* that Harry is not a pampered little prince, > > a condition he *contrasts* with Harry's normalcy. > > > > > > Alla responded: > > > > It is not a misreading, Carol, it is how I read this quote. It is > > one of the possible readings. As Lupinlore said earlier, we are > > missing the tone of Dumbledore's voice. > > > > I read "but as normal boy as I could have hoped under > > circumstances " as Dumbledore's regret about the fact that under > > those circimstances Harry could not have grown up as normal boy, who > > could be a little bit spoiled and loved. > > Carol: > Sigh. You're right. We're missing the tone of voice and it's possible > to read it your way, but given the context that you snipped, I read it > differently. for one thing, I don't think spoiled (or pampered) is the > same thing as loved. Look at Dudley, for example. > > Carol, hoping that *someone* will go upthread and respond to the idea > that Dumbledore was right about not raising Harry as a "pampered > little prince" David: I agree Carol that DD was right in his actions. You could argue in fact he had no other choice. He suspected Vmort was still alive and wanting vengance. Some of Vmort's followers were still on the loose. He had heard, from a questionable source, a prophesy foretelling Harry's future. If he had put Harry with a wizard family, yes there was the pampered/hero problem, but also the very real fact that Vmort or his followers would have just wiped them out to get Harry. He took his best shot at achieving the one end-goal that mattered; getting Harry to Hogwarts alive. This was enacting the blood-family charm to protect him. For his protection to work, Harry had to stay with a blood relative. From foxmoth at qnet.com Wed Nov 24 14:42:43 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 14:42:43 -0000 Subject: Two Wormtails was Re: Plot in OotP (wand confusion) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118492 The Other Cheryl: > > Ah, but there's the rub. Just who *did* know the spy went > under the name of Wormtail? I don't recall any canon that states that anyone did. There is canon that the DEs hid their identities, even from each other. All that was known at the time was that the informant was 'someone close to the > Potters'. Dumbledore suspected one of their coterie, but had no idea who. If he had a name, even a nickname, he'd have found out. The man's a Legillimens, people. All he'd have had to do was mention the name and wait for the answer in their minds. > > > > Renee: > If you look at message #118357, you'll see that's preciesely the > point I'm making there. My comment was a reaction to Pippin's theory that Voldemort "used the code name Wormtail for his spy Lupin in Voldemort War One, in order to taunt James and mislead Dumbledore." (Pippin's message 118343) and that "Voldemort assumed that the name "Wormtail" would get back to James, but Dumbledore kept it to himself." (Pippin's > message 118351.) > In fact, I'm in complete agreement with you; I was just arguing that *if* Dumbledore would have known the name of the spy was Wormtail, he wouldn't have sat back and done nothing.< Pippin: Actually, this reinforces my argument. Dumbledore suspected that someone close to the Potters was a spy, and just as you say, he wouldn't have sat back and done nothing. He would question all their friends whether he knew the code name or not. He would ask everyone in the Order if they had any idea how information could be reaching Voldemort, if they'd noticed anything suspicious, if they had any idea who might be a spy, if there was anything they wanted to tell him, anything at all. The spy did not give himself away. Therefore the spy not only did not answer honestly, he was capable of concealing his thoughts. Ergo, the spy is an occlumens, as skilled as Snape or better. Peter Pettigrew is a most unlikely occlumens. He does not exhibit control over his emotions, he was and is easy prey for the Dark Lord, and he is the most incompetent liar in canon, not excluding Ron. If Dumbledore followed this same line of reasoning, he would conclude that spy, whoever he might be,could not be Peter Pettigrew. If Dumbledore confided all this to James, James would reach the same conclusion. And so do I. Pippin From quigonginger at yahoo.com Wed Nov 24 14:54:22 2004 From: quigonginger at yahoo.com (quigonginger) Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 14:54:22 -0000 Subject: Hermione getting to the Burrow In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118493 Juli asked: How does Hermione gets to The Burrow every summer? > Carol responds: > Since I know how it feels to have my posts go unanswered (or snipped > down to the sign-off line), I'll take a stab at it. We don't know the > answer, of course, because the narrator is telling the story from > Harry's POV, not Hermione's, but I would guess that her family's house > is not connected to the Floo network (that would probably violate MoM > regulations), nor would the many Muggleborn students be issued > portkeys. I'm guessing that her parents drive her to the Weasleys', > since their home can be reached by a Muggle taxi (GoF). Or, if her > parents are unavailable, she can flag down the Knight Bus. Of course, > if she happens to be on the Continent when she's invited to the > Burrrow, she'd probably have to grit her teeth and take a Muggle jet > to get back to England. Who knows whether there's an equivalent to the > Knight Bus in France? > > Carol, hoping this is a satisfactory response Ginger: ok, Carol has obviously put way more thought into this than I have. I am having an intellectual interlude at the moment. Do we know where Hermione lives? For some reason I was thinking it was London, but that may just be the fruitflies in my head telling me stories. At any rate, we know she's in the UK. I just assumed (thinking that she was in London) that she just hopped the tube, got out near the Leaky Cauldron and asked Tom if she might borrow some Floo powder. Even if she isn't in London, I'm sure there's a train or bus she could take to get there and procede with the aforementioned plan. Of course, her family does travel, so it's always good to have a Plan B. Say, Carol, have you ever thought of being a WW travel agent? Ginger, telling the fruitflies to shut up. From foxmoth at qnet.com Wed Nov 24 14:55:31 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 14:55:31 -0000 Subject: Harry at the Dursleys / DD's feelings about it In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118494 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "lupinlore" wrote: > Now, I also agree, to get back to Dumbledore, that he might be trying to salvage all the good he can from a terrible situation. That is, in OOTP he might have been trying to say "Well, you were alive and you were a pretty normal kid, not a spoiled brat, and those are the only two things I can find good about this horrible situation." If that is indeed what he meant, I just wish he had come out and said it, rather than using the cryptic circumlocutions he employs.< Pippin: I think he (and Rowling) were making the point that just as parents who think they are doing their best to control a difficult child may cross the line into abuse without realizing it, parents who fondly think they are pampering their little prince may also be abusing their power. I think Dumbledore's preachy enough as it is and doesn't need to be any plainer. The books are literature, not propaganda, and I'm sure Rowling thinks her readers are smart enough to decide for themselves whether Dumbledore had good reasons to place Harry with the Dursleys or not. Pippin From willsonkmom at msn.com Wed Nov 24 15:01:21 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 15:01:21 -0000 Subject: Harry at the Dursleys / DD's feelings about it In-Reply-To: <20041124141258.55971.qmail@web53108.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118495 >>>Carol wrote: I'm not talking about Dumbledore or his real motive, which we know to be Harry's survival. I'm talking about why growing up as a "pampered prince" would be bad for Harry. Let's leave the Dursleys and Dumbledore out of it and look only at that. > > > >snip > >>Magda wrote: > I totally, completely, absolutely, 100% agree with Carol. > Potioncat wrote: I agree too, and it seems, so does Snape, who does everything in his power to keep Harry from feeling special or important. But I'm sure if DD could have placed Harry with better foster-parents than the Durleys he would have. From patnkatng at cox.net Wed Nov 24 15:26:00 2004 From: patnkatng at cox.net (Katrina) Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 15:26:00 -0000 Subject: Plot in OotP (wand confusion) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118496 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "snow15145" wrote:> > Carol: > You are certainly right, however, that Harry's perspective, though > voiced by the third-person narrator rather than by Harry himself, > limits our knowledge and occasionally distorts it. > > Snow: > Thank You! This is the reasoning behind why I replied to Renee's > post! It is not so much the theory itself that interested me but the > logistics behind it. > > Carol: > I think in this instance it's because JKR doesn't want Harry to > actually see Cedric die and she wants him to associate the death with > Voldemort (through the pain in his scar) rather than with Wormtail. I > still don't buy the argument for two Wormtails (or any other > conspiracy theory), but I certainly question the reliability of the > narrator at many points. > > Snow: > I defiantly question the reliability of the narrator and am as open > minded as I can be to all observations. Katrina: I hope I'm not guilty of over-snippage here, but wanted to chime in on the perspective issue. I once read a description of this that I thought was quite accurate. While the narrator is indeed the third person, the reader is always subject to the "Harry Filter" which puts blinders on what we are able to perceive about the Potterverse. From spotthedungbeetle at hotmail.com Wed Nov 24 15:38:29 2004 From: spotthedungbeetle at hotmail.com (dungrollin) Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 15:38:29 -0000 Subject: Hermione getting to the Burrow In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118497 Juli asked: How does Hermione gets to The Burrow every summer? Carol responded: We don't know the answer, of course, because the narrator is telling the story from Harry's POV, not Hermione's, but I would guess that her family's house is not connected to the Floo network (that would probably violate MoM regulations), nor would the many Muggleborn students be issued portkeys. I'm guessing that her parents drive her to the Weasleys', since their home can be reached by a Muggle taxi (GoF). Or, if her parents are unavailable, she can flag down the Knight Bus. Of course, if she happens to be on the Continent when she's invited to the Burrrow, she'd probably have to grit her teeth and take a Muggle jet to get back to England. Who knows whether there's an equivalent to the Knight Bus in France? Ginger added: Do we know where Hermione lives? For some reason I was thinking it was London, but that may just be the fruitflies in my head telling me stories. At any rate, we know she's in the UK. I just assumed (thinking that she was in London) that she just hopped the tube, got out near the Leaky Cauldron and asked Tom if she might borrow some Floo powder. Even if she isn't in London, I'm sure there's a train or bus she could take to get there and procede with the aforementioned plan. Of course, her family does travel, so it's always good to have a Plan B. Say, Carol, have you ever thought of being a WW travel agent? Dungrollin adds: You know, there's that bit in OotP that I always wondered about, when Hermione arrives in Grimmauld place and hammers on Harry's door... Chapter 23, Christmas on the Closed Ward: `I thought you were skiing with your mum and dad?' `Well, to tell the truth, skiing's not *really* my thing,' said Hermione. `So, I've come here for Christmas.' There was snow in her hair and her face was pink with cold. Snow? In London? In December. Not likely. Pink with cold, sure. Wet through from the incessant drizzle, maybe. Sleet, freezing fog, or showers of herring, possible; (hail, of course, is available at any time of the year, with no warning, though it's quite rare.) But snow? Don't let Bridget Jones's Diary confuse you, it just doesn't happen. (On the rare occasion that it does, it happens in February.) (If you're still not convinced, or horror of horrors, think I'm exaggerating, there's absolutely no mention of snow (or slush ? the inevitable byproduct) on the journey to St. Mungo's the next day. If you think that JKR might have just forgotten to mention it, they get to St. Mungo's on the underground, and any Londoner will tell you that the first thing that happens on those exceptional occasions on which it *does* snow in London, is that all public transport stops working immediately. JKR lived in Clapham for a while; unless she's forgotten what it's like (because of all those crisp white jewel-encrusted snowman-ridden Scottish winters), I'm willing to bet that Hermione got to Grimmauld Place directly from the Alps, and magically. How, is another matter. From quigonginger at yahoo.com Wed Nov 24 15:43:35 2004 From: quigonginger at yahoo.com (quigonginger) Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 15:43:35 -0000 Subject: the Dursleys- it's the "buts" (long) Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118498 I have been watching the Dursley abuse thread(s) with interest. Insert here the usual disclaimer that this is only my opinion and that all others are completely free to agree, disagree, be confused or any combination thereof. You know what bugs me about the Dursleys? It's the "buts". Everything that I can think of that they have done to Harry would be acceptable in other circumstances, "but" they weren't in those circumstances, and they did what they did out of a spirit of meanness. Some examples (as they pop into my head, but trying to go in order): The cupboard. It's not a bad thing for a child to have a cramped room even if it has spiders. When I was young, I had a rollaway in my dad's office. Then I moved into an unfinished, unheated basement (in North Dakota!) where there were plenty of spiders (I tried to keep them as pets-didn't work) using old bedsheets hung from the floor joists as walls. Abusive? Nope. My 78-year-old Grandma had moved in and there was no room for me. Being able to spend that time with her and get to know her before she died was worth it. BUT! The Dursleys didn't send Harry to the closet because there was no room. They had a spare room and a guest room, and in a pinch, he could have shared with Dudley. They didn't do it out of necessity, it was out of meanness. The day the Masons came. Harry put in a full days' labour. Then he was given 2 slices of bread and a lump of cheese. Now having a kid work around the house to get ready for company isn't a bad thing. Neither is having what amounts to a cheese sandwich for supper. BUT! Harry did all the work as Dudley sat around eating ice cream. Couldn't Dudley have gotten some chores too? Dudley got a nice supper with the guests. Couldn't Harry have gotten a bit to take up to his room? Nope, they worked him full out and gave him a paltry (by comparison) supper out of meanness. Harry never got a card of present for his birthday. There are some who, for religious reasons, don't celebrate birthdays. In some parts of the world whole cultures don't celebrate them. In some families they are just not a big deal. Not getting a card or present isn't the end of the world. BUT! Dudley had darn near 40 presents plus a trip to the zoo for his 11th birthday. 'Nuff said. Pure, spiteful meanness. After the Masons' visit. (I'll admit this is an extreme one.) The catflap and the bars on his windows may have been acceptable for someone who was dangerous. I have worked with people who can't always control their actions. I learned what they call "theraputic intervension" which means keeping them from knocking your block off without hurting them. *Never*, even in the most severe cases, did we confine anyone to a room and bar the windows. There have been cases where this was necessary, but (in the US anyway) you have to have a court order. And even then, you heat the darn soup! Did the Dursleys see Harry as dangerous? Sure, because of magic. Did he ever do any uncontrolled magic? (Remember, this is before the Large Marge fiasco.) Well, there was the snake at the zoo, and there may have been other things when he was little. I also have to wonder about Petunia's comment about coming back and finding the house blown up when Harry suggested they leave him when they went to the zoo. So they thought he was dangerous. BUT! Did they think he was *all of a sudden* going to turn *that* dangerous? If they had thought he was *that* dangerous all along, those windows would have had bars long before. No, they weren't just imprisioning him, they were punishing him, and they did it in a very mean way. St. Brutus' Secure Centre for Incurably Criminal Boys. You gotta admit, they had to think of something. I'm sure Hermione's parents had to think of something too. All the Muggleborn kids had to. I would bet that Hermione's parents said it was an exclusive school for gifted children. BUT! The name says it all. Have to explain his absence? Make it as mean as you can get. I could go on, but I think you have caught where I'm coming from (if you've read this far). It wasn't the things they did per se, it was the reason they had for doing it. That's where my goat gets gotten. They could have done better. Far better. I wouldn't have expected them to treat him like Dudley, but for as much as they spoiled Dudley, they could have showed a bit of decency to Harry and their favouritism would have still shown through loud and clear. They had to twist the knife, so to speak. I know there's a fine line where abuse is concerned, and whether or not what they did constitutes abuse depends on your definition, but to me one thing is clear: They had abusive intentions. And that's bad enough in my eyes. Ginger, who will give them points for creativity on the St. Brutus thing. Wishing everyone who is celebrating Thanksgiving a happy one. Safe travels if you are going anywhere. I'll be back Friday! Bye! From foxmoth at qnet.com Wed Nov 24 15:53:20 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 15:53:20 -0000 Subject: Two Wormtails was Re: Plot in OotP (wand confusion) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118499 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "nkafkafi" wrote: > > > Pippin: > > > > In GoF, there was no mystery that was nicely solved by the > > existence of two Barty's unless and until you had convinced > > yourself that Moody was a fake. > > Neri: > As I wrote upthread, there was such a mystery. It was "what was `Barty Crouch' in the map doing in Snape's office". This mystery was properly introduced to the readers (Harry, Ron, Hermione and Sirius all discussed it. I don't have the books with me so I can't pull the exact quotes). Yes, identifying fake!Moody was needed for the complete solution, but the `Barty Crouch' mystery was introduced to the reader regardless. The mystery of the Two Wormtails was never introduced to the reader, nor even hinted.< Pippin: ::raises eyebrows:: "Hero-worshipped Black and Potter. Never quite in their league, talent-wise."-- PoA ch 10 "Stupid boy... foolish boy...he was always hopeless at duelling."--PoA ch 10 "Peter needed all the help he could get from James and Sirius."--PoA ch 18 "Then, before I could curse him, he blew apart the street with the wand behind his back, killed everyone within twenty feet of himself -- and sped down into the sewer with the other rats." --PoA ch 19 "I'll never understand why I didn't see you were the spy from the start." -- PoA ch 19 "a weak, talentless thing like you" -- PoA ch 19 "You will do it quietly and without fuss; I only wish I could do it myself, but in my present condition...come Wormtail, one more obstacle removed and our path to Harry Potter is clear. I am not asking you to do it alone. By that time my *faithful* servant will have rejoined us." --GoF ch 1 "It just makes me...wonder whether...if *[Cedric]'d* known it all...he'd still be alive...."[...] "He did know this stuff," said Harry heavily."He was really good at it, or he could never have got to the middle of that maze. But if Voldemort really wants to kill you, you don't stand a chance." --OOP ch 21 The GoF exerpt makes clear that Voldemort didn't feel secure enough to take on Mad-eye with Wormtail!Peter alone. Odd, if Peter is really so powerful after all. The last exerpt has the discussion you were looking for. Of course what Harry isn't saying is that Voldemort didn't duel with Cedric, it was Wormtail, holding Voldemort's wand, as confirmed by JKR. So either Voldemort ordered "Kill the spare," and Cedric stood there like a doofus while Harry was collapsing in pain, Wormtail!Peter shifted his burden to one arm, got Voldemort's wand out of his robes, aimed it and killed him, or there was somebody else there, who obeyed the command instantly. By the way, if Voldemort knows a spell that will kill everyone within twenty feet with a wand held behind him, he really missed a bet when he was fleeing the Ministry. So will the real Wormtail please stand up? Neri: > This is not merely going out on a limb, it is going out on a limb of a limb of a limb. I think the only reason you are still up there is that even gravity can't follow the intricate reasoning ;-) Pippin: LOL! But timid speculations are just as speculative as bold ones. Unless you have hacked your way into JKR's computer, there's no way to know whether your ideas about how to solve the mysteries above are any closer to JKR's planned resolution than mine. Pippin From ginnysthe1 at yahoo.com Wed Nov 24 16:18:17 2004 From: ginnysthe1 at yahoo.com (ginnysthe1) Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 16:18:17 -0000 Subject: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118500 Kim wrote: What I saw in the scene by the lake where Sirius and James bully Snape was that two teenage boys (Sirius and James) were picking on another teenage boy (Snape) at that particular time for a particular reason, and that that reason, as Catkind suggests, is not completely clear. Nevertheless in that instance I think Sirius and James were very definitely in the wrong. Why? Because Snape was apparently minding his own business at the time and the two Marauders were bored (Sirius) and interested in impressing a girl (James wanting to impress Lily). And there's no good excuse for that. Carol responded: This part I agree with completely. Then Kim wrote: But what's missing by way of explanation in the text is the reason they'd ever chosen to bully Snape at all. I mean, Snape was the butt of their bullying long before the scene by the lake took place. My sense is that years before that they had taken an immediate dislike to Snape due to his odd ways, his greasy hair, long nose, etc. And so in that first instance of dislike and their decision to act on it, they were also in the wrong. OK, maybe Snape was understandably hard to like, but in that case they should have just left him alone. On the other hand, Snape's bullying behavior may have begun at first as retaliation for the nasty way Sirius and James had treated him for being ugly, odd, greasy, etc. And so years went by and it just escalated every time they were in each other's vicinity. And Snape appears to have no crowd of his own to hang out with and support his side of the conflict. In any case, I've always objected to explaining away cruel behavior as "boys just being boys," which people often do. It seems like a pretty lame excuse to me. Carol responded: Since we have almost no background for this time in their lives, we're all speculating at this point. I think that Sirius, for example, associated Severus with what he hated about his own home and family, which (for me) explains his vindictiveness. He may even have projected that hatred of the Dark Arts onto James as an explanation of why he disliked Severus. Kim now: I wonder if Sirius and Severus had family connections of some kind in the past. Maybe their pure-blood families knew each other from the wizarding country club... that is, assuming that the average pure- blood family goes out and about in society at one time or another. Carol continued: But James seems to be entertaining himself (and Sirius) by bullying Severus in the Pensieve scene. He dislikes him, certainly, but he doesn't seem to share Sirius's virulent hatred. Kim adds: What strikes me (and struck my father, who at my behest read all the Harry Potter books, poor man; though he thanked me later since he's hooked on them now) is how different James is from his son Harry. Despite Snape's greasiness, snobbishness, and excessive studiousness, it's hard to imagine Harry ever being that nasty to a similar kid of his own generation for the same reasons as James. Not even to impress a girl. Maybe it's because Harry has been at the bottom of the heap himself in a way, has felt like an outsider, and learned an important lesson from having been there. Then again he doesn't like the adult Snape, but I think for very different (and justifiable) reasons. But Harry doesn't take pride in harrassing other kids and seems to appreciate qualities like studiousness (like the way he appreciates Hermione the bookworm). Harry does lose his cool in OotP and takes it out on his friends, but it's not for the same reason that James bullies Severus. Carol continued: At any rate, as I've noted in other posts, Severus is not the typical weak victim any more than James, however arrogant he may be, is a typical bully. He (Severus) could do some serious damage with his wand in a fair fight, and James undoubtedly knows that. In fact, it may be one reason he stopped hexing other people (those who merely annoyed him but couldn't fight back) but couldn't resist a fight with Severus, who in other circumstances might have been more a rival than an enemy. (If only he'd wash his hair and smile once in awhile and stop burying his nose in a book. . . .) Kim responds: It seems the important thing about people like Severus is that they can be a test of the tolerance of others. He's kind of like that horrible old man in the town where Gurdjieff and his followers lived. Gurdjieff made the old man come back so that the others would learn patience and compassion. Of course I agree, such people could at least try to keep clean like everyone else... But then Severus must have his reasons for being the way he is, and maybe we'll find them out eventually. Carol continued: Also, Severus *did* have his own gang of Slytherins, or rather he was part of a gang. The problem is, most of them, including Bellatrix Black and presumably Rodolphus Lestrange, seem to have been older than he was. If any of them remained at Hogwarts at the end of Severus's fifth year, they weren't much use as friends. Either they were afraid of James or they didn't want to publicly side with greasy, studious Severus against athlete James and handsome Sirius. I think, though, that Severus would have been reluctant to join the DEs later if any of his Slytherin gang (most if not all of whom became DEs) had betrayed or deserted him on this occasion. It makes more sense (to me) that they were all older and therefore absent when the Pensieve episode occurred. (FWIW, I think that Lucius (six years older than Severus) was the original leader of the Slytherin gang, followed by Bellatrix (three years older than Severus), and that the others were closer to their ages than to Severus's. The ages come from a news article in GoF and the "Noble and Ancient House of Black" chapter of OoP, respectively, if anyone is curious.) Kim responds: All good points! Those things hadn't occurred to me. Then Carol signed off: "Carol, at a loss for a sign-off for this post" She's a comedienne and doesn't know it... (or maybe she does...) Kim, not at a loss for a sign-off for this post ;-) From mommystery at hotmail.com Wed Nov 24 16:23:07 2004 From: mommystery at hotmail.com (mommystery2003) Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 16:23:07 -0000 Subject: Hermione getting to the Burrow In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118501 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" wrote: > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "jlnbtr" wrote: > > > > On a previous post I wrote the bellow message and nobody abswer my > > main question: How does Hermione gets to The Burrow every summer? I think maybe Arthur or Molly goes and gets her and apparates with her? That's one possibility. From mommystery at hotmail.com Wed Nov 24 16:31:16 2004 From: mommystery at hotmail.com (mommystery2003) Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 16:31:16 -0000 Subject: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118502 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" wrote: > Carol responds: > This part I agree with completely. > On the other hand, Snape's bullying behavior may have begun at first > as retaliation for the nasty way Sirius and James had treated him for > > being ugly, odd, greasy, etc. ...all speculating at this point. I think that Sirius, for > example,associated Severus with what he hated about his own home and > family, which (for me) explains his vindictiveness. He may even have > projected that hatred of the Dark Arts onto James as an explanation of > why he disliked Severus. But James seems to be entertaining himself > (and Sirius) by bullying Severus in the Pensieve scene. He dislikes > him, certainly, but he doesn't seem to share Sirius's virulent hatred. But what about the remark that James made to Lily about Severus just existing? That would seem to be a remark to come more from Sirius than James, if Black does hate Severus more than James did. Whatever did Severus do to James to make a remark like that? Ces From ginnysthe1 at yahoo.com Wed Nov 24 16:33:46 2004 From: ginnysthe1 at yahoo.com (ginnysthe1) Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 16:33:46 -0000 Subject: Cot or crib? (Re: Harry at the Dursleys) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118503 Carol earlier: So a cot *is* what Americans call a crib (a child's bed with slide down railings). The portable baby bed would be a bassinette, or at least that's what it was called when I had occasion to think about the matter. Wisteria53 (UK with 3 children): Cots v cribs ... I never used the word crib - the portable one you're describing sounds like a carrycot or a Moses basket. Carol again: Anyone here familiar with nineteenth-century English poetry? Here's the beginning of Coleridge's "Aeolian Harp," where "cot" equals "cottage": My pensive Sara! thy soft cheek reclined Thus on mine arm, most soothing sweet it is To sit beside our Cot, our Cot o'ergrown With white-flower'd Jasmin, and the broad-leav'd Myrtle . . . . Picture Coleridge and his bride sitting beside a baby bed "o'ergrown" with flowers, and baby Harry lying or standing in his little cottage. Oh, the English language! [signed] Carol, who thinks "Moses basket" is a fine term for a bassinette, especially as it's readily intelligible to anyone with a smattering of biblical knowledge Childless Kim chimes in: I found the definition online. Bassinet (or bassinette?): An oblong basketlike bed for an infant. And here I thought a bassinnette was a baby bathtub. Kim (expecting this post to be expunged by elves on account of its getting too off-topic, whereas Coleridge's poem was at least on-topic since it used the word Pensieve and referred to Moaning Myrtle... ;-)) From ginnysthe1 at yahoo.com Wed Nov 24 16:41:20 2004 From: ginnysthe1 at yahoo.com (ginnysthe1) Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 16:41:20 -0000 Subject: Plot in OotP (wand confusion) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118504 Kim here, snipping the parts that preceded Katrina's post: Katrina wrote: I hope I'm not guilty of over-snippage here, but wanted to chime in on the perspective issue. I once read a description of this that I thought was quite accurate. While the narrator is indeed the third person, the reader is always subject to the "Harry Filter" which puts blinders on what we are able to perceive about the Potterverse. Kim now: I agree with what you wrote, except for the word "always." I don't think Harry filters everything. When he does and when he doesn't is of course debatable. Kim From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Wed Nov 24 16:54:00 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 16:54:00 -0000 Subject: Harry at the Dursleys / DD's feelings about it In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118505 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "lupinlore" wrote: Very well. In the *abstract*, Harry is better off not being a "pampered prince" or, if you like, a spoiled brat. I don't think that is in any way controversial. Nor do I think Alla is arguing that Harry would have been better off as a spoiled brat. Rather she is trying to say that all children in normal homes are pampered, i.e. lovingly indulged, at times and to an extent, and Harry would have been better off being "spoiled" *to that extent.* We might use the Weasleys as an example. Alla: Indeed. I am not quite sure WHY do we think that Harry would have been a spoiled brat, had he been raised in WW, just because Dumbledore THOUGHT so, when Harry was one year old. Wasn't Dumbledore at the end of OOP admitting how many mistakes in judgment he made with Harry and Sirius? Isn't it possible IF he truly thought so that he was WRONG? From mgrantwich at yahoo.com Wed Nov 24 17:01:05 2004 From: mgrantwich at yahoo.com (Magda Grantwich) Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 09:01:05 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Harry at the Dursleys / DD's feelings about it In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041124170105.24902.qmail@web53108.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 118506 > Alla: > > Indeed. I am not quite sure WHY do we think that Harry would have > been a spoiled brat, had he been raised in WW, just because > Dumbledore THOUGHT so, when Harry was one year old. > > Wasn't Dumbledore at the end of OOP admitting how many mistakes in > judgment he made with Harry and Sirius? Isn't it possible IF he > truly thought so that he was WRONG? Because from what we've seen of the wizarding world so far, I think they would have overwhelmed Harry with adulation in their relief at being free of Voldemort. It's not a reflection on Harry's character; it's an acknowledgement of society's tendency to go overboard. Magda __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Meet the all-new My Yahoo! - Try it today! http://my.yahoo.com From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Wed Nov 24 17:05:26 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 17:05:26 -0000 Subject: Harry at the Dursleys / DD's feelings about it In-Reply-To: <20041124170105.24902.qmail@web53108.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118507 Magda: Because from what we've seen of the wizarding world so far, I think they would have overwhelmed Harry with adulation in their relief at being free of Voldemort. It's not a reflection on Harry's character; it's an acknowledgement of society's tendency to go overboard. Alla: I disagree. Weasleys are wonderful example of the opposite. True, they surprised and flattered to meet Harry, but after initial shock they treat him as normal child (well, almost, Ginny does not count). I submit there is a good chance that they would have done a good job of raising him From kethryn at wulfkub.com Wed Nov 24 17:12:10 2004 From: kethryn at wulfkub.com (Kethryn) Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 12:12:10 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Hermione getting to the Burrow References: Message-ID: <00ac01c4d248$bdf45080$0402a8c0@carolina.rr.com> No: HPFGUIDX 118508 Dungrollin You know, there's that bit in OotP that I always wondered about, when Hermione arrives in Grimmauld place and hammers on Harry's door... JKR lived in Clapham for a while; unless she's forgotten what it's like (because of all those crisp white jewel-encrusted snowman-ridden Scottish winters), I'm willing to bet that Hermione got to Grimmauld Place directly from the Alps, and magically. How, is another matter. Kethryn now - I am not home so I don't have the book, of course, but Hermione got to Grimmauld Place on the Knight Bus. She doesn't say it then, I believe, but she does mention it on the trip back to Hogwarts. Kethryn From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Wed Nov 24 17:26:03 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 17:26:03 -0000 Subject: Harry at the Dursleys / DD's feelings about it In-Reply-To: <20041124170105.24902.qmail@web53108.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118509 Alla: > > Indeed. I am not quite sure WHY do we think that Harry would have > > been a spoiled brat, had he been raised in WW, just because > > Dumbledore THOUGHT so, when Harry was one year old. > > > > Wasn't Dumbledore at the end of OOP admitting how many mistakes > > in judgment he made with Harry and Sirius? Isn't it possible IF he > > truly thought so that he was WRONG? Magda: > Because from what we've seen of the wizarding world so far, I think > they would have overwhelmed Harry with adulation in their relief at > being free of Voldemort. It's not a reflection on Harry's > character; it's an acknowledgement of society's tendency to go > overboard. SSSusan: I agree that it's not a reflection of Harry's character--exceedingly little could've been *known* about Harry's character at age 15 months! A decision had to be made, with little information and quickly. I don't blame DD for worrying about this aspect of it...though if it was his *only* concern, it seems like a big gamble [see my post with questions 118489]. If it was a *secondary* concern along with what he believed was the only means of securing Harry's safety, then it makes sense to me. Siriusly Snapey Susan From olivier.fouquet+harry at m4x.org Wed Nov 24 17:27:34 2004 From: olivier.fouquet+harry at m4x.org (olivier.fouquet+harry at m4x.org) Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 18:27:34 +0100 Subject: Two Wormtails Message-ID: <21187B0C-3E3E-11D9-9ED4-000A95665DE8@m4x.org> No: HPFGUIDX 118510 > I must add here that personally, when first reading PoA, I knew > almost from the beginning that Sirius was a dog animagus (the > name "Sirius Black" was a dead giveaway) and I was sure he was > innocent. I admit that there wasn't much of a detective work behind > this. It was in part because the Dementors were so obviously the bad > guys, so Sirius must have been the good guy, and also the fact that > the book was called "the prisoner of Azkaban" and not "the murderer > from Azkaban". Probably it was also my personal liking for dogs ;-) > but I'm not surprised at all that JKR shares this liking. I also must > confess that I thought Crookshanks was the other animagus, that I > missed Lupin being a werewolf and that Scabbers!Peter got me > completely by surprise. But the clues were there and the mystery > (especially as I was sure Sirius was innocent) was there. In the case > of Two Wormtails we have no clues, no mystery and no solution in > canon. Olivier I second you on that one Neri: from my very first reading of PoA, I suspected Sirius was innocent. And the book is clearly full of mysteries that need to be accounted for. This in my opinion is the source of the whole ESE!Lupin problem. PoA is a very ambiguous when it comes to Lupin, and for the very good reason that the reader is lured into suspecting him of helping Sirius Black (or even of being Black in disguise). However, OoP is plain and straightforward when it comes to Lupin, as I have shown a while ago (message 101178) by classifying each and every scene in which Lupin appears. This is what I wrote about him in message 101178. Is Lupin ambiguous? Well, maybe he is, but the least we can say is that the non subversive way to read him is the calm, quiet, intellectual guy with a certain talent for human relation that He's the one that finds the words to tell Harry just enough about Voldemort, he seems very close to both Sirius and Molly and he is obviously trusted by Moody and Tonks (look down all the references of Moody and Lupin talking about Order business). He's courageous, saving Harry's life twice and Neville's life once during the battle. Pippin has argued that Lupin might want Harry to continue Occlumency in order to weaken Harry (it is true that Harry is particularly weak after the Occumency lessons). However, Sirius is very concerned about the end of Occlumency too. In fact, he is the first to react, before Lupin, when Harry says the lessons have ended. We can suspect that Sirius and Lupin both know from the start about Dumbledore's plan to trap Voldemort in the Mom (look up the fleeting look between them during the diner). He has also argued that Lupin's weak points are his cowardice and his desire to be liked. However, in all the references above, I fail to discern such traits. Even in the Pensieve scene, it is Peter and the pair James/Sirius who seems very concerned about being liked. Remus is utterly absent, he reads and wants to do some homework. Maybe Lupin will turn out to be evil, maybe he will be a traitor to the Order, just like Peter was the first time. However, to say that this is the natural way to read the character seems to me to be an incredible stretch. > Neri: > So here we come to the crux of it. The only plus to double!Wormtail > is that it supports ESE!Lupin. But ESE!Lupin is in itself a theory, > and not without problems. So instead of supporting a problematic > theory with more canon you support with a more problematic theory. > This is not merely going out on a limb, it is going out on a limb of > a limb of a limb. I think the only reason you are still up there is > that even gravity can't follow the intricate reasoning ;-) > > Neri Olivier Neri, your fierce defense of Lupin has owned you a PARTY LINE badge (Principle Altruistic Righteous Teacher: Yummy Lupin Is Not Evil) [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From severelysigune at yahoo.co.uk Wed Nov 24 17:35:56 2004 From: severelysigune at yahoo.co.uk (severelysigune) Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 17:35:56 -0000 Subject: McGonagall and Snape a tad OT In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118511 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "cubfanbudwoman" wrote: > > potioncat wrote: > > > I just read an interview with the actress who plays Ginny in > > > GoF. Ginny and Neville will be dancing the tango at the Yule > > > Ball. And so will Snape and McGonagall. > > > > > > I'd really like to see Snape and McGonagall doing the > > > tango....perhaps on the deleted scene section of the GoF DVD. Magda: > > PLOT ATROCITY!!!!! RUN FOR YOUR LIVES!!!!!! > > > > *sigh* Damned scriptwriters. < < SSSusan: > It's also interesting to note that the interview w/ Bonnie Wright which can be found at The Leaky Cauldron also now has the references to Snape & McGonagall doing the tango *removed.* A tangoing Snape fits Rickman!Snape, but it sure as heck doesn't fit canon!Snape... at least not outside the staff room. ;-) < Sigune (who can't resist): I agree with Magda on the rosebushes... But frankly I don't have much hope. More crucial Snape scenes have been cut - so much so that I wonder what will happen to "Worst Memory"; I bet that won't make it onto the silver screen either. Bleh. From willsonkmom at msn.com Wed Nov 24 17:43:40 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 17:43:40 -0000 Subject: McGonagall and Snape a tad OT In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118512 > Sigune (who can't resist): > I agree with Magda on the rosebushes... But frankly I don't have much > hope. More crucial Snape scenes have been cut - so much so that I > wonder what will happen to "Worst Memory"; I bet that won't make it > onto the silver screen either. > Bleh. Potioncat: And, no doubt, a kinder, gentler Snape will teach Occlumency. Potioncat, who better quit while she's ahead. From bboyminn at yahoo.com Wed Nov 24 17:56:32 2004 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 17:56:32 -0000 Subject: The Vision : Harry wasn't sleeping In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118513 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Tammy" wrote: > > Del wrote: > > *major snipping* > > > And what makes things even odder is that this is precisely the > > occurence when LV finally manages to get the whole vision through > > to Harry. He's had innumerable occasions before (pretty much every > > night), but he never managed. And yet this time, when Harry is > > apparently *not* sleeping, LV manages to take the boy through the > > whole vision. > > > > Does anyone have any explanation for that ? > Tammy replies: > > I think it's partially as it is explained by Dumbledore, that Harry > dreamt the vision before because LV was obsessed with getting the > prophecy. Once LV realized the connection however, I think that LV > kept "sending" the prophecy to Harry, hoping to entice him to > wondering about the prophecy (as partially explained by one of the > DEs, too lazy to look up which one at this point). > bboyminn: The DE in question would be Lucius Malfoy in the Hall of Prophecies; when he finds out that Harry doesn't know about his own unique prophecy, Malfoy says he wondered why Harry never came for the prophecy earlier. That implies that prior to this Voldemort was indeed projecting images to Harry, and growing frustrated with Harry's lack of response. > Tammy continues: > > I think it's a simple matter of LV sent the full vision when he was > good and ready, and everything was set up for Harry. I don't think > he would have tried it at night anyhow, as it would have been > perhaps more difficult for Harry to verify that Sirius was indeed > gone? I don't think that LV had a hard time getting the full vision > to Harry prior to that incident, I think he just didn't want to. > > -Tammy bboyminn: Voldemort is an extremely intelligent, skilled, and experienced wizard. I suspect that he is skilled enough to exploit the /connection/ once he discovers it. As a consequence, while he does NOT have /Harry Vision/, he is able to sense Harry's state of mind and determine when Harry's mind is open and vulnerable to suggestion. He then, in these moments of vulnerability, exploits this awareness of Harry's state by projecting the vision he wants Harry to see. I can see no other logical explanation as to why he would project that vision at 4:00 or 5:00 o'clock in the afternoon. As Hermione points out, Voldemort and Sirius being in the Ministry is highly unlikely to nearly impossible. So, I think Voldmeort simply sense the momentary vulnerability and exploited it. The book doesn't say that Harry fell asleep, but I think it implies it, and I think we are meant to assume it. If I recall correctly Harry didn't sleep at all the previous night, they all stayed up talking. When you are that tried, and somewhat immobile in a chair, and you close your eyes and rest your head, you are going to drop off in a second. I think that's what the book is trying to imply, that Harry rested his head, closed his eyes, and the fatigue overwhelmed him. Voldemort was making one of his frequent checks on Harry's state of mind, saw the vulnerability, and as unlikely as the vision scene was, projected it in the hope that Harry's response to Sirius in trouble would override any common sense analysis. Note since Voldemort became aware of the connection, and since the time when Rookwood gave Voldemort the correct information about the prophecy and the Dept of Mysteries, Harry's visions have been progressing. That is, each vision seems to take him a little closer to the objective. Voldemort is unaware that Harry doesn't know about the prophecy, and out of frustration, eventually comes up with the plan to exploit the information given to him (indirectly) by Kreacher. If Harry won't come for the Prophecy itself, then perhaps he will come to that location to rescue a friend. Either way Voldemort doesn't care, he doesn't care why Harry comes, he just needs to get Harry into the Dept of Mysteries - Hall of Prophecies. When the original 'Hall of Prophecies' vision fails, Voldemort switches to Plan B - 'Friend in Trouble'. What Harry lacks in curiousity, he more than make up in his 'saving people thing'. Just a few thoughts. Steve/bboyminn (was bboy_mn) From willsonkmom at msn.com Wed Nov 24 17:57:11 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 17:57:11 -0000 Subject: last dance was Re: McGonagall and Snape a tad OT In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118514 > SSSusan: > > It's also interesting to note that the interview w/ Bonnie Wright > which can be found at The Leaky Cauldron also now has the references > to Snape & McGonagall doing the tango *removed.* > > Potioncat: I solemnly swear that this is the last post I'll do on this OT subject. Go to this link and scroll to November 20th, Yule Ball. This will give you some ideas on how canon might be adjusted. Two of the child actors discuss dancing. Very cute, actually. http://www.veritaserum.com/ Potioncat (mischief managed) From spotthedungbeetle at hotmail.com Wed Nov 24 18:50:04 2004 From: spotthedungbeetle at hotmail.com (dungrollin) Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 18:50:04 -0000 Subject: Hermione getting to the Burrow In-Reply-To: <00ac01c4d248$bdf45080$0402a8c0@carolina.rr.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118515 > Dungrollin > > You know, there's that bit in OotP that I always wondered about, > when Hermione arrives in Grimmauld place and hammers on Harry's > door... > > > JKR lived in Clapham for a while; unless she's forgotten what > it's like (because of all those crisp white jewel-encrusted > snowman-ridden Scottish winters), I'm willing to bet that > Hermione got to Grimmauld Place directly from the Alps, and > magically. > > How, is another matter. > > Kethryn now - > > I am not home so I don't have the book, of course, but Hermione > got to Grimmauld Place on the Knight Bus. She doesn't say it > then, I believe, but she does mention it on the trip back to > Hogwarts. > > Kethryn You're absolutely right, she says it on the page after the bit I quoted, which I overlooked. She came straight from Hogwarts on the Knight Bus. Oh well. Still wondering where the snow came from, though. I'm sure I read a case for ESE!Hermione recently... Dungrollin Scoffing Champagne truffles that should really be savoured. From candlekicks at yahoo.ca Wed Nov 24 18:52:34 2004 From: candlekicks at yahoo.ca (candlekicks) Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 18:52:34 -0000 Subject: Spinners End Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118516 I know that this subject was talked to death a while back but I can't find the posts on it when I search so.... I was just wondering what conclusion "we" came to about where or what Spinners End represented? Personally, I think that it will be the new HQ. We know from JKR herself that Harry will be spending the shortest amount of time thus far at Privet Drive. Spinners End is the second chapter - one chapter for the Dursleys. The other thing that makes me think so is that 12 Grimmauld Place is no longer safe. There is no one to demand Kreacher's silence about the goings on there. Even if he can't give up the location, which I doubt, because of the Secret Keeper Charm from DD, they will no longer be able to prohibit him from passing on information. If you could point me in the direction of previous posts on the subject I would be grateful. Or just rehash it here!! Thanks, Linda From candlekicks at yahoo.ca Wed Nov 24 18:56:12 2004 From: candlekicks at yahoo.ca (candlekicks) Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 18:56:12 -0000 Subject: Hermione getting to the Burrow In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118517 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "dungrollin" wrote: > > > Dungrollin > > > > You know, there's that bit in OotP that I always wondered about, > > when Hermione arrives in Grimmauld place and hammers on Harry's > > door... > > > > > > JKR lived in Clapham for a while; unless she's forgotten what > > it's like (because of all those crisp white jewel-encrusted > > snowman-ridden Scottish winters), I'm willing to bet that > > Hermione got to Grimmauld Place directly from the Alps, and > > magically. > > > > How, is another matter. > > > > Kethryn now - > > > > I am not home so I don't have the book, of course, but Hermione > > got to Grimmauld Place on the Knight Bus. She doesn't say it > > then, I believe, but she does mention it on the trip back to > > Hogwarts. > > > > Kethryn > > You're absolutely right, she says it on the page after the bit I > quoted, which I overlooked. She came straight from Hogwarts on the > Knight Bus. Oh well. > > Still wondering where the snow came from, though. I'm sure I read a > case for ESE!Hermione recently... > > Dungrollin > Scoffing Champagne truffles that should really be savoured. Linda: Perhaps Hermione had a direct trip.... The Knight Bus is a fast means of transportation and there would have been snow at Hogwarts at this time of year. She could still have had snow on her from there????? Far-fetched, true, but.... From spotthedungbeetle at hotmail.com Wed Nov 24 19:39:26 2004 From: spotthedungbeetle at hotmail.com (dungrollin) Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 19:39:26 -0000 Subject: Spinners End In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118518 Linda wrote: > I know that this subject was talked to death a while back but I > can't find the posts on it when I search so.... > I was just wondering what conclusion "we" came to about where or > what Spinners End represented? If you could point me in the direction of previous posts on the > subject I would be grateful. Or just rehash it here!! > Thanks, > Linda Dungrollin says: Speculation started around post 116853, "What we find there" and continued for a while under several different thread titles. IIRC, suggestions were along the lines of Acromantula hidey-holes, new OotP HQ, the place where Hagrid took Harry for the missing 24 hours after Godric's Hollow, and the Potter's house in GH (though I may have forgotten some). Then, I think there was some side- tracking about finding real places in Britain called Spinners End (of which there are, apparently, two). I wondered, though can't remember if I ever posted the idea, whether it was a house in Godric's Hollow used for the manufacture of invisibility cloaks, which could have been James and/or Lily's job. Don't know that anything like a 'consensus' was ever reached, apart from that most people thought it is a place (with some dissenters). Dungrollin From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Wed Nov 24 20:03:23 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 20:03:23 -0000 Subject: Harry at the Dursleys / DD's feelings about it In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118519 Potioncat wrote: " But I'm sure if DD could have placed Harry with better foster-parents than the Durleys he would have." Del replies : Agreed. What I wonder is, if DD had had a choice between a very nice wizarding family, and a very nice Muggle family, which one he would have chosen. I vote for the Muggle one, because I agree with Carol, Magda and Potioncat that growing up pampered would have been disastrous for Harry, and I wouldn't trust anyone to resist the urge of pampering poor little orphaned Harry, not even (especially ?) Molly Weasley. Del From R.Vink2 at chello.nl Wed Nov 24 20:23:58 2004 From: R.Vink2 at chello.nl (Renee) Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 20:23:58 -0000 Subject: Two Wormtails was Re: Plot in OotP (wand confusion) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118520 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "pippin_999" wrote: > > > > > Renee: > I was just arguing > that *if* Dumbledore would have known the name of the spy > was Wormtail, he wouldn't have sat back and done nothing.< > > > Pippin: > Actually, this reinforces my argument. Dumbledore suspected > that someone close to the Potters was a spy, and just as you > say, he wouldn't have sat back and done nothing. > > He would question all their friends whether he knew the code > name or not. He would ask everyone in the Order if they had any > idea how information could be reaching Voldemort, if they'd > noticed anything suspicious, if they had any idea who might be a > spy, if there was anything they wanted to tell him, anything at all. > > The spy did not give himself away. Therefore the spy not only did > not answer honestly, he was capable of concealing his > thoughts. > > Ergo, the spy is an occlumens, as skilled as Snape or better. > > > Peter Pettigrew is a most unlikely occlumens. He does not > exhibit control over his emotions, he was and is easy prey for the > Dark Lord, and he is the most incompetent liar in canon, not > excluding Ron. If Dumbledore followed this same line of > reasoning, he would conclude that spy, whoever he might > be,could not be Peter Pettigrew. > > If Dumbledore confided all this to James, James would reach > the same conclusion. And so do I. > Renee: Let me guess: it was Super!Evil!MassMurderer!GaryStu!Lupin of the many talents, who now also turns out to be an Occlumens with a mind impenetrable to DD Himself. You know, I'm beginning to believe in the guy. Your Lupin makes a much better Dark Lord than Voldemort, who screws up on a regular basis. I think I'll side with him in the upcoming grand showdown; he's so brilliant, powerful and clever that he can't lose! Renee (aka Wormtail III, to be on the safe side) From feklar at verizon.net Wed Nov 24 20:27:43 2004 From: feklar at verizon.net (feklar) Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 15:27:43 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Hermione & Parents References: <20041122213523.72745.qmail@web53106.mail.yahoo.com> <00ae01c4d0e2$79ca3da0$e14dfea9@talyn> Message-ID: <00b701c4d264$0e325a40$2f01a8c0@feklaruumg829a> No: HPFGUIDX 118521 > Juli wrote: > > why do her parents let her spend every summer > > at the Weasleys' and even school holidays, don't they > > like her? don't they miss her? And does she > > miss them? > > > I don't understand why her parents let her spend most of her summer, all of > Christmas and whatever other holidays Hogwarts have (they have to have more > than those two right?) in the ww world. But it does seem that they are > trying to spend time with their daughter but she's so in love with being a > witch the muggle world is mundane in comparison. I have to admit this part of the series always struck me as a bit contrived or fanficy. To wit: the author needed them all together, so they stayed all together, somewhat in defiance of logic. I first lived away from home in college and couldn't wait to go back for Christmas, even if home was pretty boring in comparison. I have trouble imagining an 11-year old wouldn't be rather depressed to be away from home on a major family holiday. Feklar From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Wed Nov 24 20:29:20 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 20:29:20 -0000 Subject: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118522 Potioncat: As to a fair fight: James drops Severus to the ground, Severus jumps up with his wand ready and James throws a locomotor mortis. At Lily's command, James counters it and Snape stands up. Nothing is said about his wand. Lily tells James off making him mad and walks off and at that point, James jerks Severus back into the air and offers to take off his pants.Either Severus had his wand, but did not cast a curse while James and Lily were arguing, then James threw one without warning. (Was Severus the one fighting fair?) Alla: As to fairness - NO, two on one is not fair by any means, but Snape did have his wand out and it tells me that with small luck he could have turned the tables on James easily enough. Good question is why didn't he cast the curse while James and Lily were arguing? Maybe he did not want to harm Lily? I doubt that he had very nice feelings towards James at the moment or EVER. :) Potioncat: Whatever many good things James will go on to do, at this particular time, he was a real jerk. Alla: As I said many times, I do consider Pensieve scene on its own to be plain and simple bullying. I do think though that whatever happened there has VERY long backstory. We'll see. Was James a jerk at fifteen? Absolutely. Was Snape one? YES, IMO, if only judging by the name he called Lily. From foxmoth at qnet.com Wed Nov 24 20:34:53 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 20:34:53 -0000 Subject: Lupin's secrets was Re: Two Wormtails In-Reply-To: <21187B0C-3E3E-11D9-9ED4-000A95665DE8@m4x.org> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118523 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, olivier.fouquet+harry at m... wrote: > Is Lupin ambiguous? Well, maybe he is, but the > least we can say is that the non subversive way to read him is the calm, quiet, intellectual guy with a certain talent for human relation that > > He's the one that finds the words to tell Harry just enough about Voldemort, he seems very close to both Sirius and Molly and he is obviously trusted by Moody and Tonks (look down all the references of Moody and Lupin talking about Order business). He's courageous, saving Harry's life twice and Neville's life once during the battle. > > > Maybe Lupin will turn out to be evil, maybe he will be a traitor to the Order, just like Peter was the first time. However, to say that this is the natural way to read the character seems to me to be an incredible stretch. Pippin: It depends on whether you think you are reading a mystery. If so, and you accept the author's invitation to play detective, it then becomes your business to keep your wits about you and suspect everyone, especially innocent-seeming people who have secrets. Lupin's secrets are not all exposed at the end of PoA, nor is it true that no additional ones are introduced in OOP. We do not know: 1)how he could have misjudged the time he would transform 2) why his friends thought he was a spy 3) the extent of his knowledge about dementors 4) why he seems able to read Harry's mind, and to block Snape's attempts to read his own 5) why his boggart is still referred to as a silvery orb in OOP if it is supposed to be the full moon 6) where that case with Professor RJ Lupin on it came from 7) what he was doing between the disaster at Godric's Hollow and PoA. 8) what he is doing for the Order That is an awful lot of blank space for one character. Only Snape has as much ambiguity and mystery about him, and nobody considers *him* above suspicion, though many hope he will prove to be. . We agree that Lupin is an occlumens and a legilimens. How did he learn and who taught him? It doesn't seem to be the kind of thing you can learn from books. It also isn't some freakish ability of werewolves, whatever Snape thinks: FBAWTFT says that a werewolf has the mind of a sane and normal human, except when transformed. Pippin From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Wed Nov 24 20:38:19 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 20:38:19 -0000 Subject: Lupin's secrets was Re: Two Wormtails In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118524 Pippin: > We agree that Lupin is an occlumens and a legilimens. Alla: I am sorry, Pippin, but I just have to ask. Who agrees that Lupin is legilimens and occlumens? I know I don't. Is there a definite quote supporting it? From feklar at verizon.net Wed Nov 24 20:51:15 2004 From: feklar at verizon.net (feklar) Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 15:51:15 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] "Pampered prince" real reason? / Re: Harry at the Dursleys References: <20041124140105.18488.qmail@web53102.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <00e501c4d267$57149e50$2f01a8c0@feklaruumg829a> No: HPFGUIDX 118525 Magda-- > everyone's arguments as some posters seem to think. Harry had to be > at the Dursleys because of the magical protection. This is not > negotiable, however unfortunate it might be for Harry personally. feklar-- But why would HP need more protection than the average wizarding kid in the average wizarding household? This implies that DD knew there was something out there, that LV wasn't really gone, [insert manipulative!DD theory of your choice], etc. From mgrantwich at yahoo.com Wed Nov 24 20:52:41 2004 From: mgrantwich at yahoo.com (Magda Grantwich) Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 12:52:41 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Too "Good" Harry / The resolution of Snape In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041124205241.11541.qmail@web53105.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 118526 --- justcarol67 wrote: > At any rate, I don't think Snape will "snuff it" early in Book 7, > as Magda predicted, or even in the middle. He's such a key > character, not to mention such an interesting one, and there are so > many enigmas about him that JKR has yet to resolve, that I don't > see how she could kill him off any earlier than the penultimate > chapter, when he would bravely save Harry and die fully redeemed in > the eyes of all but the most determined Snape haters. Or better > yet, IMO, not die at all, and change only enough to show Harry that > his loyalties do indeed lie with Dumbledore, the Order, and Harry > himself. Well, for reasons I personally don't understand, JKR seems to think the Trio are much more interesting than the adult characters. Weird, but there you go. So I'm afraid that most of the adult characters are expendable as far as she's concerned, and that includes Snape. I agree that Snape doing something heroic and saving the ungrateful little prat - er, the Boy Who Lived - would be a fitting end. I just don't see Snape surviving the war. > Carol, who thought Magda was a Snapefan but must have been mistaken > :-( OOOOOOOOOOOOHHHH! I am SO a Snapefan. *sniff* Magda __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - You care about security. So do we. http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From foxmoth at qnet.com Wed Nov 24 20:57:54 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 20:57:54 -0000 Subject: Lupin's secrets was Re: Two Wormtails In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118527 > Pippin: > > > We agree that Lupin is an occlumens and a legilimens. > > > Alla: > > I am sorry, Pippin, but I just have to ask. Who agrees that Lupin is legilimens and occlumens? I know I don't. > > Is there a definite quote supporting it? Pippin: Sorry, "we" referred to Olivier and myself -- I didn't mean to imply that the opinion was canon or universal. The phrase "as if he had read Harry's mind" follows Lupin around like a puppy. In PoA Lupin has an "odd, closed" expression (ch 14). That is too similar to "occlumency" to be anything but a hint -- IMO. Pippin From willsonkmom at msn.com Wed Nov 24 21:43:52 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 21:43:52 -0000 Subject: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118528 > Alla: > > As to fairness - NO, two on one is not fair by any means, but Snape > did have his wand out and it tells me that with small luck he could > have turned the tables on James easily enough. Good question is why > didn't he cast the curse while James and Lily were arguing? Maybe he > did not want to harm Lily? I doubt that he had very nice feelings > towards James at the moment or EVER. :) > Potioncat: Which is sort of what I'm getting at. What was he waiting for? Was Severus distracted by Lily? Did he consider the fight over? Did he consider it unfair? As angry as he seemed to be, I'm surprised he didn't fire off a curse or two during that time. But he didn't. Yet in a moment, James fires back at him. From willsonkmom at msn.com Wed Nov 24 21:47:10 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 21:47:10 -0000 Subject: "Pampered prince" real reason? / Re: Harry at the Dursleys In-Reply-To: <00e501c4d267$57149e50$2f01a8c0@feklaruumg829a> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118529 > feklar-- > > But why would HP need more protection than the average wizarding kid in the > average wizarding household? This implies that DD knew there was something > out there, that LV wasn't really gone, [insert manipulative!DD theory of > your choice], etc. Potioncat: And DD says exactly that in OoP...sorry, can't get to source, but I think it's the morning after the DoM battle. From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Wed Nov 24 21:48:52 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 21:48:52 -0000 Subject: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118530 catkind wrote: I don't actually believe there is such a thing as a "typical" > victim. But there has to be a difference between bullying and > fighting, and in this instance James and Sirius together are clearly > stronger than Snape alone, which seems to make it bullying. > > Whether Potter vs Snape would be a fair fight isn't clear - given that in the pensieve scene Snape pulls his wand first but still doesn't get a shot in, I'd think probably even James alone would be sufficiently much faster to squish him, from a standing start. Carol responds: I absolutely agree that it's bullying, on both James's and Sirius's part. But I'm not sure that James is "quicker on the draw" than Severus. It's not clear from the description of the scene whether James has his wand out already, but since Sirius has pointed Severus out to him and James is the one who "greets" (insults) Severus, I'm pretty sure that he does. Note the narrator's description of Severus's reaction: "Snape reacted *so fast* that it was as though he had been expecting *an attack*; dropping his bag, he plunged his hand inside his robes, and his hand was halfway into the air when James shouted, "Expelliarmus!" (646). So even taken off guard and unarmed, Severus is quick, but James is prepared for the *attack* and is almost certainly already armed. So we can't judge their relative speed in a fair fight from this scene, but I think Severus reacts as fast as it's possible to do under the circumstances. It does not help, of course, that Sirius immediately jumps in and shouts "Impedimenta!" preventing Severus from getting to the wand James has expelled from Severus's hand. That, of course, makes the bullying still worse. Not only has James attacked an unarmed opponent with inadequate warning, it's now two against one. I don't think that Severus was normally weaker than James alone, especially given his knowledge of hexes and his willingness to use them. It's the circumstances and the behavior of the two Gryffindors that make Severus a victim, and James and Sirius Bullies, in this particular instance. catkind wrote: > I have the feeling both parties in this conflict think the other > doesn't play fair - James detests Snape for his use of dark arts hexes and so on, and sees that Snape is really aiming to injure. > Snape, on the other hand, probably thinks James is being unfair in > using such humiliation tactics, and not letting it be a "fair fight". > I bet he'd prefer to be hexed than have his underwear shown off. Carol responds: We really don't have James's view on this subject. He says that he hexes Severus "because he exists." It's the adult Sirius who credits James with a hatred of the Dark Arts. (I wonder if he's projecting his own hatred of his Dark Wizard parents onto Snape and assuming that James shares his hatred. As I've noted elsewhere, James is quite casual, and even seems surprised that Lily would criticize him for harmlessly amusing the onlookers--his apparent attitude, not mine!) At any rate, he certainly knows that Severus is capable of injuring him. And Severus is certainly right that "humiliation tactics," in addition to an unprovoked attack and two against one, is unfair. Your last sentence I absolutely agree with. Considering that this incident is "Snape's Worst Memory," at least according to the narrator, I would almost bet that Severus Snape, boy or man, would rather be *Crucio'd* than publicly humiliated. (Not that I think James would cast an Unforgiveable Curse, only that Severus would rather suffer injury to his body than his pride.) We don't know for sure, of course, but that's how he appears to me. Carol From stonehenge.orders at verizon.net Wed Nov 24 20:33:49 2004 From: stonehenge.orders at verizon.net (kjirstem) Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 20:33:49 -0000 Subject: Pampering (was Re:Harry at the Dursleys) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118531 > Carol: > Sigh. You're right. We're missing the tone of voice and it's >possible to read it your way, but given the context that you snipped, >I read it differently. for one thing, I don't think spoiled (or >pampered) is the same thing as loved. Look at Dudley, for example. > > Carol, hoping that *someone* will go upthread and respond to the >idea that Dumbledore was right about not raising Harry as a "pampered > little prince" kjirstem: Sorry I didn't go back to your original post, I hope you aren't upset. I'm not particularly attached to one argument or another in this issue, but thought I'd list some of the advantages and disadvantages to being pampered. I'm sure this list isn't exhaustive, and I had difficulty thinking of advantages. Pampering: Advantages: -Feel cared for (loved?) -Trust people more (?) Disadvantages: -Expect others to do things for you. (perhaps therefore not learn how to do things oneself) -Expect others to indulge your desires or feelings -inflated sense of self-worth (?) On the other hand we have life with the Dursleys: Advantages: -stable and consistent -learns how to do things (chores) -goes to school -not dead yet Disadvantages: -Treated meanly -Not told about WW, magic, parents -Questions outlawed The effect of any environment on a given person's personality & behavior seems likely to be moderated by that person's past, by their existing personality, and probably by genetics to some extent. In Harry's case, certainly it seems that feeling cared for would be good, but I think that it is just as well if he doesn't trust people too much. The disadvantages (to pampering) seem to me to outweigh the advantages, since it seems likely that he will need to rely upon himself and his assessment of a situation to survive. I also think that Harry gains something in learning how to cook and how to do various chores. As far as losing out in early magic learning, well, doesn't seem that there is that much of it, really, since the kids from muggle families seem to do quite well at Hogwarts. It's hard for me to decide if living in the WW would have been an advantage to Harry - on one hand he would know everyone and know what magic can do, on the other hand I think he might be better off not having preconceptions about people's abilities or about magic. I think there is a possibility that Dumbledore wanted Harry not to be too attached to the WW or to particular individuals in the WW. It is conceivable that Harry will need to make choices that someone who can't imagine a world without magic would be unable to make. Or, conversely, perhaps the WW and Harry's friendships in it will be even more valuable to him as a result of his early experience. I don't think life with the Weasley's would have been a good alternative, even leaving aside the blood-relative protection. I was struck by Molly's tendency to exempt Harry from chores or punishment when he is at the Burrow. (For example, post rescue from the Dursley's via Ford Anglia.) Besides, then he and Ron might have been competing their whole lives. All in all, I think pampering wouldn't have done Harry any good. So, I have to add in somthing that seems to diverge from the majority opinion around here ... I'm sad to hear that there will be less of the Dursley's in HBP. I really like the scenes with them, nothing else in HP makes me laugh so much. They just seem so over the top as to be unbelievable. I mean, really, who gives someone a tissue as a present? Most people seem to think they are horrible, as I do too, but I also think they are horribly funny. kjirstem - who once thought she had been given a *box* of tissues as a gift... From jlnbtr at yahoo.com Wed Nov 24 21:41:18 2004 From: jlnbtr at yahoo.com (Juli) Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 13:41:18 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Hermione getting to the Burrow In-Reply-To: <00ac01c4d248$bdf45080$0402a8c0@carolina.rr.com> Message-ID: <20041124214118.27461.qmail@web53110.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 118532 > > Dungrollin > > You know, there's that bit in OotP that I always > wondered about, > when Hermione arrives in Grimmauld place and hammers > on Harry's > door... > > > JKR lived in Clapham for a while; unless she's > forgotten what > it's like (because of all those crisp white > jewel-encrusted > snowman-ridden Scottish winters), I'm willing to bet > that > Hermione got to Grimmauld Place directly from the > Alps, and > magically. > > How, is another matter. > Juli: She arrived at 12 GP by the knight bus, but I don't believe she was at the Alps, she probably was at Hogwarts, she arrived the day after Harry and the Weasleys (the vision ocurred early in the morning, she stayed up all night till 5 am when Molly arrived, On the afternoon they went to St Mungo's and then back to 12 GP, where Harry spends all night alone and the next day he doesn't leave his room all morning and sometime in the afternoon Hermione arrives). She mentions she got there in the knight bus, she also says DU was very angry cause they left before the term was over so she had to wait till the Christmas break started. And we know from canon that it snows, so my bet is she went to 12 GP directly from Hogwarts. Juli __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - You care about security. So do we. http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From spinelli372003 at yahoo.com Wed Nov 24 20:39:52 2004 From: spinelli372003 at yahoo.com (spinelli372003) Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 20:39:52 -0000 Subject: Hermione & Parents In-Reply-To: <00b701c4d264$0e325a40$2f01a8c0@feklaruumg829a> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118533 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "feklar" wrote: > > Juli wrote: > > > why do her parents let her spend every summer > > > at the Weasleys' and even school holidays, don't they > > > like her? don't they miss her? And does she > > > miss them? Hermione does not spend every holiday and break with the Weasleys. after the first and second book she was not with the Weasleys at all. It was in the 3rd book that she is at the same place at the same time. She goes home for the Christmas break. Harry and Ron are at Hogwarts at Christmas. I think she went Skiing in France with her parents. It is in the 4th book that she is with the Weasleys for the Quidditch World Cup and then stays at school for the Yule Ball. Sherry From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Wed Nov 24 22:08:30 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 22:08:30 -0000 Subject: Harry at the Dursleys In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118534 Tammy wrote: > > I too see Dumbledore's comments as him being glad he's not a pampered little prince. Actually I think "pampered little prince" can actually be translated from Dumbledore's nice version to the not so nice "spoiled little brat", which is what I think Dumbledore meant, but is way too nice to use. > > > > The way I see it, Dumbledore was afraid that Harry would come out> ending up like Lockhart or Draco, who are both spoiled and pampered brats. > > > > If Harry had been raised in a wizarding home, where the fame could change his personality and make him spoiled and pampered, would he then still be able to be the one to go out and kill LV as the prophecy seems to indicate? If you consider that Dumbledore knew the prophecy and probably read it as "Harry has to kill LV," then Dumbledore probably feared Harry going to a wizarding home where he would end up being spoiled and pampered, and not learning the harsh lessons he needed to learn. > > Siriusly Snapey Susan responded: > While I agree w/ this assessment of what DD was likely thinking > regarding the "pampered little prince" & placing Harry w/ the > Dursleys...and have, in fact quite recently, defended that action... > I must confess that something just struck me. Perhaps it was Tammy's mentioning "like Draco". > > Tammy argued that DD was thinking about the prophecy when he decided > Harry should be kept out of the WW because he was thinking about > Harry's having to kill Voldy someday, and he wanted a child who would be most able to do that, hence, *not* a spoiled, pampered, > egotistical, puffed up brat. I've thought this was part of it, too--along w/ DD's believing that the only truly *safe* place for Harry was w/ his blood relative. [Alas, not totally safe, as it turns out, but safe from Voldy & his henchmen.] > > But what struck me just now was that by leaving Harry in the Muggle > World, with no indication that he's magical, while this likely > ensures the no pampered prince part of the equation, DD's also > ensuring that young Harry will *not* be doing what Draco [and other > WW kids such as the Weasleys] are likely doing--learning magic! If > Harry's going to have to be skilled enough to defeat Voldy at some > undetermined date in the future, it's an interesting call to *remove* Harry from any opportunity to learn any kind of magic at all until age 11. > > Was that an awfully big gamble that it would take Voldy at least that long to return? > > Was it more important that Harry not be a pampered little prince than that he get the chance to learn some magic? Carol responds: If the wizarding family followed the laws of the WW, Harry would not have been allowed to practice magic before age eleven anyway, nor would he have owned a wand. Only a few students, mostly those from Dark Wizard families (Severus Snape and possibly Draco) seem to know much about magic (other than the accidental variety and possibly flying) before they get to Hogwarts. Besides, Harry the "pampered prince" would have thought he knew what he needed to know already. After all, he had "defeated" Voldemort at the age of fifteen months. I don't think being a "pampered prince" would have helped him learn magic at an earlier age. It might, however, have led to arrogance and an undisciplinable "know-it-all" attitude that would have been very disadvantageous, not to mention dangerous to himself and the whole WW, in the future opponent of Voldemort. Carol, who thinks that DD is both wise and good, but neither omnipotent nor omniscient, and that placing Harry with Muggles was indeed in his best interest for a variety of reasons From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Wed Nov 24 22:33:46 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 22:33:46 -0000 Subject: McGonagall and Snape a tad OT In-Reply-To: <20041124140752.68525.qmail@web53101.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118535 potioncat wrote: > > > I just read an interview with the actress who plays Ginny in GoF. > > Ginny and Neville will be dancing the tango at the Yule Ball. And > > so will Snape and McGonagall. > > > > I'd really like to see Snape and McGonagall doing the > > tango....perhaps on the deleted scene section of the GoF DVD. > > Magda responded with admirable calmness: (;-) ) > PLOT ATROCITY!!!!! RUN FOR YOUR LIVES!!!!!! > > *sigh* Damned scriptwriters. > > They'd better include Snape blasting the rose bushes apart - that is > one of my favourite moments in the entire series. Although they > probably won't - the prats. Carol agrees, sort of: I don't think they *can* remove that scene because it involves Snape talking to "Igor" (Karkaroff), which prepares us for the later scene(s) involving the Dark Mark. IOW, it's too important to omit. Also, they've cut Percy's role, which may leave room for expanding, or at least not reducing, Karkaroff's. And the Karkaroff/Snape connection is of course crucial there. (The scene with Crouch!Moody alluding to Snape's Dark Mark also had better not be cut. Or the Foe Glass, or Snape's dangerous mission at the end. Altogether, he's a key player in GoF and I hope the new director makes better use of him than Cuaron did.) I do think it would be fun to see Rickman!Snape and Smith!McGonagall dancing the tango, though it's way too Muggleish and un-British for my idea of the WW, not to mention out of character for both teachers. (I had a similar reaction to the slide projectors and Victrolas in the Azkaban film, and Lupin's Muggle clothes and Hitler mustache. Sorry. Wrong list!) I do think there's a friendly rivalry and mutual respect between Snape and McGonagall (who is old enough to be his mother and *was* his teacher) throughout the series, and I'd love to see more interaction between them, but nothing so uncanonical as a tango and not at the expense of the rosebush scene! Carol, hoping she's made this post sufficiently canon related despite the second paragraph From gbannister10 at aol.com Wed Nov 24 22:44:16 2004 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 22:44:16 -0000 Subject: Harry at the Dursleys / DD's feelings about it In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118536 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "dumbledore11214" wrote: > > > Magda: > Because from what we've seen of the wizarding world so far, I think > they would have overwhelmed Harry with adulation in their relief at > being free of Voldemort. It's not a reflection on Harry's character; > it's an acknowledgement of society's tendency to go overboard. > > > Alla: > > I disagree. Weasleys are wonderful example of the opposite. True, > they surprised and flattered to meet Harry, but after initial shock > they treat him as normal child (well, almost, Ginny does not count). > > I submit there is a good chance that they would have done a good job > of raising him Geoff: I think it was Carol who beat me to the draw earlier today by pointing out that the track record for youthful celebrities in the real world is littered with mishaps. So often, people who have become child prodigies - or something similar - have expected adulation wherever they go, have wanted to behave just as they wished. There have been cases of sexual misbehaviour, drug abuse, loutish behaviour and, as I think was highlighted, sometimes death from drugs (and I think there was also a fairly high rate of car deaths among youthful film stars and pop singers in years past). River Phoenix's name comes to mind as one sad casualty and people such as Macaulay Culikn seem to have had rather chequered lives as they grew up. Perhaps Harry might have been able to steer clear from such pitfalls, but they would have been lurking there, waiting to derail his life if he had got into a situation where everybody stood agape when he was introduced or rushed to shake his hand. "Fame's a fickle friend. Celebrity is as celebrity does". I wonder who said that..... :-) Geoff http://www.aspectsofexmoor.com Exmoor National Park views, walks and West Somerset Railway steam and diesel views From nkafkafi at yahoo.com Wed Nov 24 22:47:54 2004 From: nkafkafi at yahoo.com (nkafkafi) Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 22:47:54 -0000 Subject: Two Wormtails was Re: Plot in OotP (wand confusion) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118537 > > Neri: The mystery of > the Two Wormtails was never introduced to the reader, nor even > hinted.< > > Pippin: > ::raises eyebrows:: > > "Hero-worshipped Black and Potter. Never quite in their league, > talent-wise."-- PoA ch 10 > > "Stupid boy... foolish boy...he was always hopeless at > duelling."--PoA ch 10 > > "Peter needed all the help he could get from James and > Sirius."--PoA ch 18 > > "Then, before I could curse him, he blew apart the street with the > wand behind his back, killed everyone within twenty feet of > himself -- and sped down into the sewer with the other rats." > --PoA ch 19 > > "I'll never understand why I didn't see you were the spy from the > start." -- PoA ch 19 > > "a weak, talentless thing like you" -- PoA ch 19 > > "You will do it quietly and without fuss; I only wish I could do it > myself, but in my present condition...come Wormtail, one more > obstacle removed and our path to Harry Potter is clear. I am not > asking you to do it alone. By that time my *faithful* servant will > have rejoined us." --GoF ch 1 > > > "It just makes me...wonder whether...if *[Cedric]'d* known it > all...he'd still be alive...."[...] > "He did know this stuff," said Harry heavily."He was really good at > it, or he could never have got to the middle of that maze. But if > Voldemort really wants to kill you, you don't stand a chance." > --OOP ch 21 > > The GoF exerpt makes clear that Voldemort didn't feel secure > enough to take on Mad-eye with Wormtail!Peter alone. Odd, if > Peter is really so powerful after all. > > The last exerpt has the discussion you were looking for. Of > course what Harry isn't saying is that Voldemort didn't duel with > Cedric, it was Wormtail, holding Voldemort's wand, as confirmed > by JKR. So either Voldemort ordered "Kill the spare," and Cedric > stood there like a doofus while Harry was collapsing in pain, > Wormtail!Peter shifted his burden to one arm, got Voldemort's > wand out of his robes, aimed it and killed him, or there was > somebody else there, who obeyed the command instantly. > > By the way, if Voldemort knows a spell that will kill everyone > within twenty feet with a wand held behind him, he really missed > a bet when he was fleeing the Ministry. > > So will the real Wormtail please stand up? > Neri: I agree that the passages you brought may be seen (if one chooses to) as presenting a mystery "is Peter strong or weak?" I'd even say that if not for that "correct!" of JKR it would have been possible to claim that there is a mystery "did Peter really kill Cedric?". BUT there is no reason in canon to think that the "real" killer of Cedric is also called, for some reason, "Wormtail". The idea of the "second Wormtail" was invented in order to explain how JKR didn't lie when she confirmed in the chat that Wormtail killed Cedric. So there is no mystery "who else besides Peter was called Wormtail" in canon. In the case of the "what was Barty Crouch doing in Snape's office" mystery, a shrewd reader could realize that it might be another person of the same name, because Harry didn't actually see Crouch Sr in Snape's office, he saw the NAME in the Marauder's Map. But in the Wormtail case we don't have any reason to think that the "real" killer of Cedric also goes by the NAME "Wormtail", other than to claim that JKR's answer in a chat was, for all practical purpose, a lie. JKR answered "correct" when asked "did Wormtail kill Cedric" while knowing that 99.9% of us believe "Wormtail" is Peter. She also knows that when she says something unambiguous in a chat, 99.9% of us accept it as the simple truth. In these conditions saying "correct!" was tantamount to saying: "there is no mystery who killed Cedric. This case is close and you don't need to waste time in this direction." If she wanted to leave this mystery open she could have, as you wrote, simply ignored this question. > Pippin: > LOL! But timid speculations are just as speculative as bold > ones. Unless you have hacked your way into JKR's computer, > there's no way to know whether your ideas about how to solve > the mysteries above are any closer to JKR's planned resolution > than mine. Neri: I'm not sure what do you mean by "timid" and "bold" here. If my choice is between a speculation that fits nicely with several canon points vs a speculation that has no canon to support it (or even clear canon against it), I'd usually say that the first speculation has higher chances of guessing JKR's planned resolution. Otherwise, what do we need canon for? Inventing FF plots is much easier than solving the mystery. Neri From mgrantwich at yahoo.com Wed Nov 24 23:24:04 2004 From: mgrantwich at yahoo.com (Magda Grantwich) Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 15:24:04 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] "Pampered prince" real reason? / Re: Harry at the Dursleys In-Reply-To: <00e501c4d267$57149e50$2f01a8c0@feklaruumg829a> Message-ID: <20041124232404.13815.qmail@web53109.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 118538 > feklar-- > > But why would HP need more protection than the average wizarding > kid in the > average wizarding household? This implies that DD knew there was > something > out there, that LV wasn't really gone, [insert manipulative!DD > theory of your choice], etc. > He knew that Voldemort wasn't dead. How did he know this? We haven't found out yet. But this is one of the unsolved mysteries of the series that will tell us a lot more about the past when we hear the truth. I don't think it means manipulative!Dumbledore. M!D implies that Dumbledore knows whats going on but I think he's just winging it better and with less hand-wringing than almost anyone else would. Magda __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? The all-new My Yahoo! - What will yours do? http://my.yahoo.com From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Wed Nov 24 23:27:48 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 23:27:48 -0000 Subject: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118539 Ces attributed the following quotes to me: Carol responds: > > This part I agree with completely. Carol notes: I did write this sentence. Quote continues: [> > On the other hand, Snape's bullying behavior may have begun at first as retaliation for the nasty way Sirius and James had treated him for being ugly, odd, greasy, etc.] Carol again: The bracketed words, snipped by Ces, are Kim's. (I would never call Snape ugly. Granted, he should wash his hair and bleach his teeth, but an aquiline nose could be considered aristocratic, and the adult Snape is no longer skinny and round-shouldered. . . . I digress.) > Quote resumes: > ...all speculating at this point. I think that Sirius, for example, associated Severus with what he hated about his own home and family, which (for me) explains his vindictiveness. He may even have projected that hatred of the Dark Arts onto James as an explanation of why he disliked Severus. But James seems to be entertaining himself (and Sirius) by bullying Severus in the Pensieve scene. He dislikes him, certainly, but he doesn't seem to share Sirius's virulent hatred. Carol again: Okay, these are my words (snipped by Ces) > Ces wrote: > But what about the remark that James made to Lily about Severus just > existing? That would seem to be a remark to come more from Sirius > than James, if Black does hate Severus more than James did. Whatever did Severus do to James to make a remark like that? Carol responds: I don't think we can assume from James's words that Severus did anything. It seems like a feeble excuse to me--and to Lily as well, apparently. Even if Severus deserved James's dislike, and I see no indication *in this scene* that he did, he certainly didn't deserve an unprovoked attack by two opponents who caught him off guard. And no one deserves to be attacked "because they exist." Carol, requesting that posters be a bit more careful in their snipping and attributions From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Wed Nov 24 23:42:08 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 23:42:08 -0000 Subject: Plot in OotP (wand confusion) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118540 Katrina wrote: > I hope I'm not guilty of over-snippage here, but wanted to chime in > on the perspective issue. > > I once read a description of this that I thought was quite > accurate. While the narrator is indeed the third person, the reader > is always subject to the "Harry Filter" which puts blinders on what > we are able to perceive about the Potterverse. > > Kim responded: > I agree with what you wrote, except for the word "always." I don't > think Harry filters everything. When he does and when he doesn't is > of course debatable. Carol notes: FWIW, here's a link to one of my fairly recent posts on the topic of JKR's limited omniscient narrator and his (or her) occasional unreliability. There are others on the same topic if anyone wants to brave Yahoo!mort to find them: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/116981 Carol From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Thu Nov 25 00:05:49 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2004 00:05:49 -0000 Subject: Harry at the Dursleys / DD's feelings about it In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118541 Magda wrote: > Because from what we've seen of the wizarding world so far, I think > they would have overwhelmed Harry with adulation in their relief at > being free of Voldemort. It's not a reflection on Harry's character; it's an acknowledgement of society's tendency to go overboard. > > > Alla: > > I disagree. Weasleys are wonderful example of the opposite. True, > they surprised and flattered to meet Harry, but after initial shock > they treat him as normal child (well, almost, Ginny does not count). > > I submit there is a good chance that they would have done a good job > of raising him Carol asks: You don't think he would have been "Molly coddled" or given nicer clothes and toys than the Weasley children because his parents had left him money, just as he receives nicer dress robes than Ron for the Yule Ball? Molly *does* distinguish between him and her own children, in part because she's trying to make up for the mother love he never received, but I think there's no question that she also considers him special because of who he is (the Boy Who Lived). And the Weasley children might not be so fond of him if he'd been raised in their home as a "pampered prince" while they had to share second-hand toys and wear hand-me-down robes. And they would have been in Harry's shadow from an early age, much more than Ron is now. No one ever bowed to Percy or the twins in the street, and no one ever will. It would be very difficult for the children not to resent the celebrity in their midst, and for Harry, or any child raised in such circumstances, not to see himself as superior to the children who weren't "heroes." Carol, not wanting to start another anti-Molly thread but still sure that a normal upbringing for Harry was unlikely in the WW From stbjohn2 at yahoo.com Thu Nov 25 01:11:31 2004 From: stbjohn2 at yahoo.com (stbjohn2) Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2004 01:11:31 -0000 Subject: McGonagall and Snape a tad OT In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118542 Carol wrote: > I do think it would be fun to see Rickman!Snape and Smith!McGonagall > dancing the tango, though it's way too Muggleish and un-British for my > idea of the WW, not to mention out of character for both teachers. (I > had a similar reaction to the slide projectors and Victrolas in the > Azkaban film, and Lupin's Muggle clothes and Hitler mustache. Sorry. > Wrong list!) > > Sandy: Out of character, you bet. Snape, at best, would be a stiff box-step waltz, and then only if forced to dance at wand point. And MM, a foxtrot maybe. (Now, I can see DD doing a tango, maybe Flitwick, and I'm not sure why, but maybe Sybill Trelawney) (and I just wanted to second your parenthetical on POA). Sandy, who felt this list needed a little levity after all the heavy discussions going on lately... (and happy T-day to everyone.) From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Thu Nov 25 01:13:39 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2004 01:13:39 -0000 Subject: Pampering (was Re:Harry at the Dursleys) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118543 Kjirstem : I'm sad to hear that there will be less of the Dursley's in HBP. I > really like the scenes with them, nothing else in HP makes me laugh so much. They just seem so over the top as to be unbelievable. I mean, really, who gives someone a tissue as a present? Most people seem tothink they are horrible, as I do too, but I also think they are horribly funny. Alla: Well, we don't know wehethre it will be less Dursleys in HBP or not. We only know that Harry will have his shortest stay at privet Drive ever. I suppose it means less Dursleys, but who knows, maybe some back story will be revealed, which includes Dursleys. Now, about them being funny. Of course, their reactions are funny sometimes. I said it earlier - I am not sure why such reactions should be mutually exclusive. I cringe at many Snape's remarks at Harry and Neville and want to slap him, but I also find some of them hysterical (like your "head is not allowed in Hogsmead speech" or even "I see no difference" ) remark. So, really it is perfectly fine to think that Dursleys are funny. :) From Schlobin at aol.com Thu Nov 25 01:28:50 2004 From: Schlobin at aol.com (susanmcgee48176) Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2004 01:28:50 -0000 Subject: Spinners End In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118544 > > Dungrollin says: > > Speculation started around post 116853, "What we find there" and > continued for a while under several different thread titles. > > IIRC, suggestions were along the lines of Acromantula hidey-holes, > new OotP HQ, the place where Hagrid took Harry for the missing 24 > hours after Godric's Hollow, and the Potter's house in GH (though I > may have forgotten some). Then, I think there was some side- > tracking about finding real places in Britain called Spinners End > (of which there are, apparently, two). > > I wondered, though can't remember if I ever posted the idea, whether > it was a house in Godric's Hollow used for the manufacture of > invisibility cloaks, which could have been James and/or Lily's job. > > Don't know that anything like a 'consensus' was ever reached, apart > from that most people thought it is a place (with some dissenters). > > Dungrollin In the United States, JKR would be thought of as a classicist. All those lovely spells in Latin.....I just had a lovely web journey to the Lexicon..I knew that Patronum meant guardian or defender, and I knew that expecto could mean I expect but I kept thinking it meant something about breath..loe and behold...the alternative meaning of expecto is to expel from the chest, i.e.to send forth from one's self which of course makes sense given the Dementors sucking out breath... That woman has an amazing mind... Given that, I'll say again that Spinners End probably has something to do with fate or destiny, referencing the Greek fates The Fates were the the three who controlled the destiny of men and women. The names of the three were: Clotho (Nona), the spinner; Lachesis (Decuma), the measurer; and Atropos (Morta), the web cutter. From foxmoth at qnet.com Thu Nov 25 02:13:36 2004 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2004 02:13:36 -0000 Subject: Two Wormtails was Re: Plot in OotP (wand confusion) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118545 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "nkafkafi" > Neri: > I agree that the passages you brought may be seen (if one chooses to) as presenting a mystery "is Peter strong or weak?" I'd even say that if not for that "correct!" of JKR it would have been possible to claim that there is a mystery "did Peter really kill Cedric?". BUT there is no reason in canon to think that the "real" killer of Cedric is also called, for some reason, "Wormtail". The idea of the "second Wormtail" was invented in order to explain how JKR didn't lie when she confirmed in the chat that Wormtail killed Cedric.< Pippin: If you care to check back to message 40370, which was posted in June of 2002 you will find Elkins discussing the idea of whether Snape thought "Wormtail" was Sirius, ie the spy. It's not the original post on the subject (YahooMort was giving me grief) but at least it proves that fans were already discussing this notion, suggested by canon, a long time before JKR made that statement. As I said before, it was a solution to Snape's apparent knowledge of the Marauder nicknames. If JKR *meant* the PoA passage as a clue that there was some doubt about who was meant by "Wormtail" then her chat answer gives those who have figured out that Wormtail is not necessarily Peter a wink and a nod, while those who don't get it are no further misled than they were before. I thought the answer was mostly aimed at explaining to younger readers how Cedric's shadow had come from the wand when Voldemort hadn't done the actual killing. If Snape *knew* "Wormtail" the spy could not have been Pettigrew, it makes his denials and his fury in PoA much more understandable. It could even be that "Sirius Black proved he was capable of murder at the age of sixteen. You haven't forgotten that, Headmaster? You haven't forgotten that he once tried to kill *me*?" is a coded conversation which does not refer to the Prank only, but to a later attempt on Snape's life by the DE Wormtail. I wouldn't be surprised if Dumbledore has some doubts about Lupin..IIRC, he's never left alone with Harry after PoA. And it could be that Sirius's house arrest was necessary because Dumbledore feared an Order member might try to kill him -- as long as he stayed in the house, the spy couldn't attack without proving that there was a traitor in the order once again. Pippin From witchypooh67 at yahoo.com Thu Nov 25 02:30:33 2004 From: witchypooh67 at yahoo.com (witchypooh67) Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2004 02:30:33 -0000 Subject: Foreshadowing? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118546 I have watched the PoA DVD about a zillion times since yesterday and I am trying to figure out the important parts (anything for a clue about what is to come in books 6 & 7). In an interview included on the DVD, JKR says there are a few parts in the movie that foreshadow things to come in books 6 & 7. I also remember reading somewhere (I can't find it now) that JKR asked Cuaron to leave something in the movie becuase it was important later in the story. My guess is that the foreshadowings could be when Sirius tells Harry that those we love never really leave us and DD's rant about dreams when the students are asleep in the Great Hall. (If book 7 ends with the whole thing being a dream, I might throw all 7 books away!) :) I am thinking the important part that had to be left in is either the second prophesy or the firebolt since both seem thrown into the movie and aren't explained well. Any thoughts? Kelly From stevejjen at earthlink.net Thu Nov 25 02:55:54 2004 From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese) Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2004 02:55:54 -0000 Subject: Lupin's secrets was Re: Two Wormtails In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118547 Alla: > > I am sorry, Pippin, but I just have to ask. Who agrees that Lupin > is legilimens and occlumens? I know I don't. > > > > Is there a definite quote supporting it? > Pippin: > Sorry, "we" referred to Olivier and myself -- I didn't mean to imply > that the opinion was canon or universal. > > The phrase "as if he had read Harry's mind" follows Lupin > around like a puppy. In PoA Lupin has an "odd, closed" > expression (ch 14). That is too similar to "occlumency" to be > anything but a hint -- IMO. Jen: There are several other quotes to support that Lupin is a Legilimens: "But then...," Lupin muttered, staring at Black so intently it seemed he was trying to read his mind,...why hasn't he shown himself before now? Unless"---Lupin's eyes suddenly widened, as though he was seeing something beyond Black, something none of the rest could see..." (US, POA, chap. 17, p. 344). "Ron, Hermione, Fred and George's heads turned from Sirius to Mrs. Weasley as though following a tennis rally...Lupin's eyes were fixed on Black." (Then later in the text): "Personally," said Lupin quietly, looking away from Sirius at last..." (OOTP, US, chap. 5, pps. 88-89). Jen again: I do think Lupin is a Legilimens, and learning Occlumency must be part of the package. But learning these skills doesn't have to be further evidence for ESE!Lupin. I tend to believe Lupin lived on the edge of Wizard society after leaving Hogwarts, perhaps even teaching in some small, little-known Wizard school (a dodgy, unrecognized school would be even better) in another part of Europe. This would explain Lupin's tattered black briefcase and also why his friends believed he was the spy--because he was living far away from them at the time, teaching and working on Order business, and they couldn't keep daily tabs on him. I'd say Lupin's Order business was risky and perhaps even required him to keep his identity a secret, thus learning Legilimency and Occlumency. Lupin may have been recruiting members from other 'outcast' groups or even been a spy, transmitting information to Dumbledore about underground operations in other areas. All this is to say that Lupin could easily have lived a life on the edge, without casting his allegiance to Voldemort. The WW has a dark underbelly i.e. Knockturn Alley, Mundungus, which suggests there are many places Lupin might find he fits in better than the mainstream WW. It doesn't mean he had to be a criminal or evil to live a very different life from James, Sirius and Peter after finishing Hogwarts. This might lead to all sorts of suspicions about Lupin, much like Molly has about Mundungus. Jen, hoping she can earn a PARTY LINE badge from Olivier, too ;). (Principle Altruistic Righteous Teacher: Yummy Lupin Is Not Evil) From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Thu Nov 25 03:09:32 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2004 03:09:32 -0000 Subject: Lupin's secrets was Re: Two Wormtails In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118548 > Jen: There are several other quotes to support that Lupin is a > Legilimens: "But then...," Lupin muttered, staring at Black so intently it seemed he was trying to read his mind,...why hasn't he shown himself before now? Unless"---Lupin's eyes suddenly widened, as though he was seeing something beyond Black, something none of the rest could see..." (US, POA, chap. 17, p. 344) snips second quote > Jen again: I do think Lupin is a Legilimens, and learning Occlumency must be part of the package. But learning these skills doesn't have to be further evidence for ESE!Lupin. I tend to believe Lupin lived on the edge of Wizard society after leaving Hogwarts, perhaps even teaching in some small, little-known Wizard school (a dodgy, unrecognized school would be even better) in another part of Europe. This would explain Lupin's tattered black briefcase and also why his friends believed he was the spy--because he was living far away from them at the time, teaching and working on Order business, and they couldn't keep daily tabs on him. Alla: Thanks for the quotes, Jen. Yes, I would say that the first one especially supports Legilimens!Lupin. But as you said, it does not necessarily mean ESE!Lupin. Personally. I am inclined to believe that remus was one of Order insider spyes, just as Snape was. Who knows, maybe Remus WAS approached by Voldemort agents for recruitment and maybe he agreed because Dumbledore asked him to. I just think that suspicion of him being a spy must have been based on SOME mistake. Maybe James or Sirius witnessed remus meeting with suspicious people and mistrust went from there. From jlnbtr at yahoo.com Thu Nov 25 04:05:22 2004 From: jlnbtr at yahoo.com (Juli) Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 20:05:22 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups]Re: Foreshadowing? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041125040522.46041.qmail@web53101.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 118549 Kelly wrote: > My guess is that the foreshadowings could be when > Sirius tells Harry > that those we love never really leave us Juli: I would like to believe that very much, because I felt really sad after Sirius crossed the veil, maybe somewhere in book seven we'll see Harry with Lily, James, Sirius and the rest of his family (without thw Dursleys of course), I don't mean that Harry will die, just hang with them, just like he did with the mirror of Erised and with the Priori Incantem in the duel with Voldemort. I hope this time they have more time to talk, I believe Harry does need this and probably will need them even more as the final battle aproaches, he'll need all the suport he can get, and The Weasleys, the Trio and DD may not be enough. If I remember correctly there was a greveyard scene at the PoA movie, which wasn't in the book, this could be a foreshadowing of book 4 (LV rising), or something else in bool 6 or 7, maybe Sirius' funeral. Juli __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From hickengruendler at yahoo.de Thu Nov 25 06:08:05 2004 From: hickengruendler at yahoo.de (hickengruendler) Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2004 06:08:05 -0000 Subject: Pampering (was Re:Harry at the Dursleys) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118550 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "dumbledore11214" wrote: > Alla: > > Well, we don't know wehethre it will be less Dursleys in HBP or not. > We only know that Harry will have his shortest stay at privet Drive > ever. I suppose it means less Dursleys, but who knows, maybe some > back story will be revealed, which includes Dursleys. > > Hickengruendler: I don't really think so, during the Edinburgh book reading she said, that HBP will be the least we see of the Dursleys in all the books and that they'll get more involved in book 7. The script is on her website. Hickengruendler From khinterberg at yahoo.com Thu Nov 25 06:18:02 2004 From: khinterberg at yahoo.com (khinterberg) Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2004 06:18:02 -0000 Subject: [HPforGrownups]Re: Foreshadowing? In-Reply-To: <20041125040522.46041.qmail@web53101.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118551 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Juli wrote: > > Kelly wrote: > > > My guess is that the foreshadowings could be when > > Sirius tells Harry > > that those we love never really leave us > > Juli: > I would like to believe that very much, because I felt > really sad after Sirius crossed the veil, maybe > somewhere in book seven we'll see Harry with Lily, > James, Sirius and the rest of his family (without thw > Dursleys of course), I don't mean that Harry will die, > just hang with them, just like he did with the mirror > of Erised and with the Priori Incantem in the duel > with Voldemort. I hope this time they have more time > to talk, I believe Harry does need this and probably > will need them even more as the final battle > aproaches, he'll need all the suport he can get, and > The Weasleys, the Trio and DD may not be enough. > > If I remember correctly there was a greveyard scene at > the PoA movie, which wasn't in the book, this could be > a foreshadowing of book 4 (LV rising), or something > else in bool 6 or 7, maybe Sirius' funeral. > > Juli > khinterberg: I think that Sirius's saying that the ones we love never really leave us isn't foreshadowing so much as a statement of pure truth. Because in the muggle world and wizarding world alike. One part that jumped out at me as far as foreshadowing goes was Dumbledore's statement that Dementors will not distinguish their target from the one who gets in their path, because this was not mentioned in the book at all. Also, Lupin's talk about how much Lily was there for him, also not alluded to whatsoever in the book. As far as his relatioship with Lily, Cuar?n said in that same interview that he didn't put anything in there that directly contradicted Jo's current and future books, so I believe we have to take this statement as being close to the truth at least. khinterberg From hpfgu_elves at yahoo.co.uk Thu Nov 25 07:42:28 2004 From: hpfgu_elves at yahoo.co.uk (hpfgu_elves) Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2004 07:42:28 -0000 Subject: ADMIN: Movie Discussion Not Allowed In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118552 Hello, everyone-- Afraid this thread is bit too OT for this list. Any discussion of rumors of what will or will not be in upcoming HP films must happen on our Movie list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPFGU-Movie/ Please take this discussion there, folks. Thanks! The List Elves From naama_gat at hotmail.com Thu Nov 25 07:49:10 2004 From: naama_gat at hotmail.com (naamagatus) Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2004 07:49:10 -0000 Subject: Lupin's secrets was Re: Two Wormtails In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118553 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "dumbledore11214" wrote: > > Alla: > > Thanks for the quotes, Jen. Yes, I would say that the first one > especially supports Legilimens!Lupin. > > But as you said, it does not necessarily mean ESE!Lupin. Personally. > I am inclined to believe that remus was one of Order insider spyes, > just as Snape was. > > Who knows, maybe Remus WAS approached by Voldemort agents for > recruitment and maybe he agreed because Dumbledore asked him to. I > just think that suspicion of him being a spy must have been based on > SOME mistake. Maybe James or Sirius witnessed remus meeting with > suspicious people and mistrust went from there. What I have to say relates both to Lupin being a possible spy within the DEs group, and to Lupin being a spy within his own group (i.e., a traitor): IT'S REDUNDANT!!!! Apologies for yelling. But really - this is not a spy novel, a Le Carre type of story. What on earth would it add to the STORY to have both Pettigrew and Lupin spies for Voldemort? Or both Snape and Lupin spies for DD? It makes sense when that's the focus of the tale - espionage, the shifting perception of reality, the inability to fully trust anyone. Surely it is clear that that is not what HP is about? These issues are minor, elements JKR uses to enhance the tension and pace of the story - but they are not what the story is *about*. There is no constantly underlying question of whether people (as a general rule) can be trusted - as a general rule, people are what they seem. In fact, it's remarkable how basically unchanged everybody is since PS - the Durseleys, Hagrid, DD, Hermione, Ron, the Weasleys, etc. - all the people in Harry's life are pretty much what they have always been. If there have been changes, it's development, that is change that is compatible with the point of origin. JKR is simply not interested in the deep question of whether you can ever really know somebody else. She doesn't deal with it. The large majority of the characters she creates are adequetly known - both to the reader and to Harry. Since that's not a real issue for her, it makes no sense for the resolution of this story to involve the revelation of such deep deceit [this argument, by the way, is also relevant for all puppet master!DD types of theories]. Further, if we're talking ESE!Lupin theory, that would make half of Harry's father's group of best friends traitors. Again, not compatible with the underlying feel of the books that people, generally, are trustworthy. Naama From gbannister10 at aol.com Thu Nov 25 07:50:22 2004 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2004 07:50:22 -0000 Subject: Harry at the Dursleys / DD's feelings about it In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118554 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" wrote: Carol: > You don't think he would have been "Molly coddled" or given nicer > clothes and toys than the Weasley children because his parents had > left him money, just as he receives nicer dress robes than Ron for the > Yule Ball? Geoff: This has just made me sit up and think. I've never made a connection with mollycoddling here but could this be another of JKR's tongue-in- cheek name jokes? Was Ron's mother called Molly to emphasise this? From bboyminn at yahoo.com Thu Nov 25 08:15:39 2004 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2004 08:15:39 -0000 Subject: "Pampered prince" real reason? / Re: Harry at the Dursleys In-Reply-To: <00e501c4d267$57149e50$2f01a8c0@feklaruumg829a> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118555 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "feklar" wrote: > Magda-- > > everyone's arguments as some posters seem to think. Harry had to be > > at the Dursleys because of the magical protection. This is not > > negotiable, however unfortunate it might be for Harry personally. > feklar-- > > But why would HP need more protection than the average wizarding kid > in the average wizarding household? This implies that DD knew there > was something out there, that LV wasn't really gone, [insert > manipulative!DD theory ofyour choice], etc. bboyminn: Why would Harry need more protection than the average wizard boy? Because he was the apparent downfall of Voldemort, and as Dumbledore explains, there were still many loyal Death Eaters who escaped detection and prosecution who were as terrible and ruthless as Voldmeort himself, and would likely stop an nothing to seek revenge. I think Dumbledore suspected that Voldmort may have lost the battle, but may indeed have survived the war. I suspect that solid evidence of the events at Godrics Hollow and Voldie's defeat were sketchy, and had to be complied through a lot of supposition. Consequently, no one could say for absolute certianly that Voldemort could not return, the only clear thing apparently was that he was gone in that moment. So we have double trouble, vengefull Death Eaters on the loose, and Voldemort gone but his true fate unclear. Under the circumstances, Dumbledore would logically want to give Harry as much protection as possible until he returned to the wizard world and learned how to take care of himself. Just a thought. Steve/bboyminn (was bboy_mn) From azriona at juno.com Thu Nov 25 08:54:46 2004 From: azriona at juno.com (Sharon) Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2004 08:54:46 -0000 Subject: Spy novel? maybe (was Lupin's secrets ) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118556 Naama: What on earth would it add to the STORY to have > both Pettigrew and Lupin spies for Voldemort? Or both Snape and Lupin > spies for DD? It makes sense when that's the focus of the tale - > espionage, the shifting perception of reality, the inability to fully > trust anyone. Surely it is clear that that is not what HP is about? > These issues are minor, elements JKR uses to enhance the tension and > pace of the story - but they are not what the story is *about*. No, HP isn't a spy novel per se. But what I *do* see it being about is faith, love, and loyalty. Whether or not someone is a spy, loyalty to Dumbledore or to Voldy comes very much into play, and therefore is central to the overall story itself. Is one of the five books specifically about spies and traitors? Of course not. But spies and traitors are very much a part of the overall story. If you removed them, you've lot a great deal of the meaning. Naama: There is no constantly underlying question of whether people (as a > general rule) can be trusted - as a general rule, people are what > they seem. I disagree. We first saw Sirius Black as a traitorous friend, a murderer and someone who was out to kill Harry. We learned later this wasn't true. Our first impressions of Peter was that he was a loyal, brave (if weak) boy who desperately loved James and Lily enough to put himself in harm's way. We know that wasn't true (strictly speaking). We saw Fudge as a capable, confident Minister of Magic who trusted Dumbledore's decisions and respected Harry Potter. We know that's not true. Originally, Dumbledore was a kind old man who seemed to have Harry's best interests at heart. And Lupin was just a poor professor who for some reason couldn't find a job. Mad-Eye Moony taught DADA in Harry's fourth year! And the kicker? Tom Riddle was seen as one of the people who made Hogwarts *safer* fifty years previously by discovering the Heir of Slytherin! Misconceptions of people abound in HP. No, you can't trust a first impression of anyone, because the longer you give JKR, the more she'll show you why your first impression just wasn't true. Naama: The large > majority of the characters she creates are adequetly known - both to > the reader and to Harry. Since that's not a real issue for her, it > makes no sense for the resolution of this story to involve the > revelation of such deep deceit [this argument, by the way, is also > relevant for all puppet master!DD types of theories]. I don't agree. I don't think we can take anyone in these books at face value. JKR has proven time and time again that her story goes much deeper than just "Snape hates Harry." Instead, it is "Snape hates Harry *because*..." "Voldemort hates Muggles *because*..." "Lupin can't find a job *because*..." And in each instance, the because is often far more intersting than the fact which preceeds it. Are these characters adequately known? Not by half! We don't know: 1. Why Peter turned. 2. Why Petunia knows about Dementors and Azkaban. 3. What Dumbledore told Petunia, exactly, and how many letters he's sent her. 4. What the real meaning behind the Prophecies is. 5. What important Luna and Neville have. 6. Who the HPB is. We're not even *close* to adequate yet. At least, not for me. --azriona From Aisbelmon at hotmail.com Thu Nov 25 09:47:35 2004 From: Aisbelmon at hotmail.com (M.Clifford) Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2004 09:47:35 -0000 Subject: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118557 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" wrote: > It's not clear from the description of the scene whether > James has his wand out already, but since Sirius has pointed Severus out to him and James is the one who "greets" (insults) Severus, I'm pretty sure that he does. Note the narrator's description of Severus's reaction: > > "Snape reacted *so fast* that it was as though he had been expecting *an attack*; dropping his bag, he plunged his hand inside his robes, and his hand was halfway into the air when James shouted, > "Expelliarmus!" (646). So even taken off guard and unarmed, Severus is quick, but James is prepared for the *attack* and is almost certainly already armed. So we can't judge their relative speed in a fair fight from this scene, Valky: The phrase "as though he had been expecting an attack" in no way leads to an assumption that james was still armed. Snape was 'expecting" an attack, from Harry's POV. This information is gleaned by Harry, *strictly*, from Snapes reaction. If James' wand was out before Snape moved then the POV of Harry would not be that Snapes reaction was *as though* he had been < note the curiosity of the narration > *expecting an attack*, surely. The appropriate wording in the case of James' wand already being out and aimed at Snape would be: Snape reacted quickly to the impending attack. The attack was not obvious, James wand was not drawn or aimed. Of that I am entirely certain. Justcarol: > It does not help, of course, that > Sirius immediately jumps in and shouts "Impedimenta!" preventing > Severus from getting to the wand James has expelled from Severus's > hand. That, of course, makes the bullying still worse. Not only has > James attacked an unarmed opponent with inadequate warning, it's now two against one. > > I don't think that Severus was normally weaker than James alone, > especially given his knowledge of hexes and his willingness to use > them. It's the circumstances and the behavior of the two Gryffindors that make Severus a victim, and James and Sirius Bullies, in this particular instance. > Valky: With this I agree. Sirius' actions and the duo's behaviour are exactly why this is bullying, once James gets the better of Snape he is free title to them. No personal intent Carol but I just don't understand why others feel the necessity to construe the story to say that James attacked an unarmed opponent without warning, it's overkill. The words simply don't support it, and it doesn't change the fact that he behaved like an Ar*e following it. > catkind wrote: > > I have the feeling both parties in this conflict think the other > > doesn't play fair - James detests Snape for his use of dark arts > hexes and so on, and sees that Snape is really aiming to injure. > > Snape, on the other hand, probably thinks James is being unfair in using such humiliation tactics, and not letting it be a "fair fight". I bet he'd prefer to be hexed than have his underwear shown off. > Valky: Gosh, catkind I think you are sooo right about this. > Carol responds: > We really don't have James's view on this subject. He says that he > hexes Severus "because he exists." It's the adult Sirius who credits James with a hatred of the Dark Arts. (I wonder if he's projecting his own hatred of his Dark Wizard parents onto Snape and assuming that James shares his hatred. As I've noted elsewhere, James is quite casual, and even seems surprised that Lily would criticize him for harmlessly amusing the onlookers--his apparent attitude, not mine!) > Valky: Overkill! Carol. James just simply isn't this bad, you just want him to be, right? Sirius statement about James *Hating* the Dark Arts is adamant and sincere, How can you doubt that? Of all the things that Sirius has said? From mommystery at hotmail.com Thu Nov 25 12:56:51 2004 From: mommystery at hotmail.com (mommystery2003) Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2004 12:56:51 -0000 Subject: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118558 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" > Carol, requesting that posters be a bit more careful in their snipping and attributions Carol, I'm so sorry, I knew that remark didn't come from you, I just totally screwed up! I was thinking more on my response than what you actually did say. Forgive me! Am I to take it that you are a Snape Fan from a couple of your remarks? Ces - hoping Carol realizes it wasn't done on purpose From willsonkmom at msn.com Thu Nov 25 13:19:38 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2004 13:19:38 -0000 Subject: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118559 > Valky: > The phrase "as though he had been expecting an attack" in no way > leads to an assumption that james was still armed. >snip The attack was not obvious, James wand was not drawn or > aimed. Of that I am entirely certain. Potioncat: Just to clarify, James calls out "All right, Snivelus?" Do you think Severus was wrong to go for his wand? Looking at the description of Sirius and Peter, James was up to something, we can see it, and Severus must have had reason to expect it. > snipping Carol's point and part of Valky's Valky: No personal intent Carol but I just don't understand why others feel > the necessity to construe the story to say that James attacked an > unarmed opponent without warning, it's overkill. The words simply > don't support it, and it doesn't change the fact that he behaved > like an Ar*e following it. Potioncat: Well, James did Expelliarmus, then Sirius did another curse. What do you call it? I would be willing to consider Expelliarmus defense, except that it doesn't stop there and at that point all Severus had done was to pull his wand to defend himself. > snipping Carol's point > Valky: > Overkill! Carol. James just simply isn't this bad, you just want him > to be, right? > Sirius statement about James *Hating* the Dark Arts is adamant and > sincere, How can you doubt that? Of all the things that Sirius has > said? Potioncat: Even if Sirius is correct and the reason for James' dislike of Severus is due to Dark Arts, it doesn't excuse this incident. I am of the opinion that there is more to learn about this and I've seen Sirius be wrong before. I've not certain that knowking Dark Arts is any worse than hexing people just because you can. I know James will go on to become a very good person, but I stand by my opinion that he is not a good person in this scene. From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com Thu Nov 25 13:25:31 2004 From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (arrowsmithbt) Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2004 13:25:31 -0000 Subject: Pampering (was Re:Harry at the Dursleys) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118560 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "dumbledore11214" wrote: > > So, really it is perfectly fine to think that Dursleys are funny. :) I beg your pardon? Do I understand you correctly? The implication of your statement is that permission has been granted to think this and further, that there are thoughts that are *not* perfectly fine, that may not only be alternative readings that you disagree with, but may somehow breach an arbitrary orthodoxy that other posters may not be aware of and need your guidance to comply with. I really hope that I have misunderstood, that this is not the case, that you are not implying that the acceptability or otherwise of a member's theories is in your competence. Diversity of opinion is the life-blood of the site. The understanding of all who read the posting rules is that members are free, nay encouraged, to express views on canon, unpopular or not, irrespective of whether another member concurs with their opinion or not. If that understanding is in error, I want to know about it - now. Kneasy From olivier.fouquet+harry at m4x.org Thu Nov 25 13:34:55 2004 From: olivier.fouquet+harry at m4x.org (olivier.fouquet+harry at m4x.org) Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2004 14:34:55 +0100 Subject: Lupin's secrets Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118561 Pippin: It depends on whether you think you are reading a mystery. If so, and you accept the author's invitation to play detective, it then becomes your business to keep your wits about you and suspect everyone, especially innocent-seeming people who have secrets. Olivier I must confess I don't read HP novels as mysteries at all. I read them as psychological novel telling the story of a child growing up to be an adult. However, I admit it is reasonable to read them as mysteries and that my point of view is certainly not the standard one. I would still remark that they are very peculiar whodunnit in the sense that, for the most part, each book ends with its own mysteries solved. At the end of PS, we knew who was trying to steal the stone, at the end of CoS we knew who was behind the attacks, at the end of GoF all the questions are answered (and they were a bunch), at the end of OoP we know what Harry's visions mean, who sent the Dementors and why LV was after Harry in the first place. Considering this, I don't think it is too bold a leap of faith to assume that the solution proposed at the end of PoA (that is, Peter was the traitor) is the correct and definite one. Or maybe it is time to ask ourselves if it was really Lupin who was commanding the basilisk in CoS? Pippin Lupin's secrets are not all exposed at the end of PoA, nor is it true that no additional ones are introduced in OOP. We do not know: 1)how he could have misjudged the time he would transform 2) why his friends thought he was a spy 3) the extent of his knowledge about dementors 4) why he seems able to read Harry's mind, and to block Snape's attempts to read his own 5) why his boggart is still referred to as a silvery orb in OOP if it is supposed to be the full moon 6) where that case with Professor RJ Lupin on it came from 7) what he was doing between the disaster at Godric's Hollow and PoA. 8) what he is doing for the Order Olivier Those are very valid points: we don't know a lot about Remus. These are my beliefs on each of these questions. 1) I think this was a mandatory plot event. If JKR wanted to write a tightly close book, it was necessary that we get to see Lupin as a werewolf. I, for one, consider the Shrieking Shack scene as a very good and powerful one with its many bangs and its alternating pace (slowed and tensed). I like it better that way than in the more "realistic" guise where Lupin would have transformed sometimes during the explanations and thus before Sirius had had a chance to offer Harry a new home. 2) Wether you believe in ESE!Lupin or not, James made the wrong choice, didn't he? I admit it is strange he would trust Peter more than Lupin. Maybe he thought the werewolf condition had turned Lupin's head after all. If ESE!Lupin proves to be just a theory, I bet this is going to stay unexplained anyway. 3) He is a qualified teacher in DADA, I would see a mystery if he didn't know anything about them. 4) Point granted, Lupin seems to have Legilimens and Occlumens capability. 5) My knowledge of English is very incomplete, still a "silvery orb" sounds as a very familiar metaphor for the Moon. Are we to believe that John Keats verses in Endymion "But gentle Orb! there came a nearer bliss" is actually referring to a prophesy? (it could well be actually, the poem speaks about "orby power", "silvery shower" and "arch", I bet Keats had a vision of the MoM). 6) I always assumed Lupin did some teaching for a living before coming to Hogwarts. 7) Mourning his friends and doing some teaching despite anti-werewolf discrimination. He never contacted Harry, but no-one did before Harry was admitted to Hogwarts (or very discreetly). Not Dumbledore, not McGonagall, not Hagrid. That leaves a two year gap. There again, a balance was to be achieved: either Lupin had appeared in the first book (realistic but effectively ruining most of PoA intrigue) or PoA was a great book. 8) Harry doesn't know. He doesn't know what Dumbledore, McGonagall, Moody, and Tonks are doing either, and for a very good reason. In OoP, it is never hinted that Lupin has some special status in the Order, quite the contrary, he is often seen discussing with Moody and Tonks (and other members) about "Order business". The only character whom Harry questions the involvement is Snape. Pippin That is an awful lot of blank space for one character. Only Snape has as much ambiguity and mystery about him, and nobody considers *him* above suspicion, though many hope he will prove to be. Olivier Whether you accept my answers or not, you must concede that, for some readers like myself, the mysteries you point out are rather non-mysterious. On the other hand, there is one big undeniable mystery about Snape: what made him changed sides? And there are dozens of smaller mysteries, each of which are harder to solve (in my very humble opinion) than any of those above. Examples would be why he stopped Harry from warning Dumbledore in GoF when Harry met Crouch Senior, what was he doing all the while between Harry's warning in OoP and Dumbledore rescue party (many hours of delay), what is he doing for the Order, why does Dumbledore trust him, why did he tolerate the end of Occlumency lessons while it was so crucial to the Order, why did he threaten to kill Sirius in PoA etc. etc. Many of the questions above can be answered quite easily (using plot arguments, plausible hidden motives or psychological reasons). If you accept these answers for Snape (as I do), maybe it is not absurd to consider them for Lupin. . Pippin We agree that Lupin is an occlumens and a legilimens. How did he learn and who taught him? It doesn't seem to be the kind of thing you can learn from books. It also isn't some freakish ability of werewolves, whatever Snape thinks: FBAWTFT says that a werewolf has the mind of a sane and normal human, except when transformed. Olivier Lupin is a knowledgeable wizard, I see no reason why he wouldn't have learned that specific branches of magic. Considering the fact that the Marauders managed to keep their transformations secret from Dumbledore himself, one can speculate that Lupin learned this in high-school, maybe while his friends were busy turning into Animagi (or maybe while they were busy hexing Snape and playing Quidditch). Olivier, always happy to fence against Pippin [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From naama_gat at hotmail.com Thu Nov 25 13:49:36 2004 From: naama_gat at hotmail.com (naamagatus) Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2004 13:49:36 -0000 Subject: Spy novel? maybe (was Lupin's secrets ) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118562 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Sharon" wrote: > >snip> > Is one of the five books specifically about spies and traitors? Of > course not. But spies and traitors are very much a part of the > overall story. If you removed them, you've lot a great deal of the > meaning. > I think you'd lose (as I said in my last) a driving force in the plot and the readability (the page-turner quality), but not so much in meaning. > > Naama: > There is no constantly underlying question of whether people (as a > > general rule) can be trusted - as a general rule, people are what > > they seem. > > I disagree. We first saw Sirius Black as a traitorous friend, a > murderer and someone who was out to kill Harry. We learned later > this wasn't true. > > First, my argument is about the *general* trustworthiness of people in the Potterverse. Secondly: 1. We, and Harry, never "saw" Sirius or Peter. We hear of them, we see Sirius' picture - that's all. Neither of them gained Harry's trust and then betrayed that trust, in the way that Pippin is postulating that Lupin has. 2. Fudge was signed (not least, by his name) from the very beginning as a moral coward - not evil, but reluctant to face unpleasant realities. The first time we see him, if you remember, he is caving under public pressure - he is sending Hagrid to Azkaban for the sole purpose of being as doing something (the classical scapegoating manoeuver). 3. I still see DD as kindly and as having Harry's best interests at heart. The end of OotP, in fact, should show us how very much at heart he had Harry - to the point of risking the final defeat of Voldemort. 4. Lupin really was poor and he really had a hard time finding a job. What we find out about him doesn't contradict that. I didn't say that we always know everything about a character right away - that would make the story boring; but, *by and large*, added information does not contradict previous information. 5. Actually, the Moody example strengthens my argument. Moody (the real Moody) is exactly the kind of person the readers are led to believe he is - loyal to the cause and to DD. The twist is that somebody else impersonated him. To me, this shows how reluctant JKR is to subvert readers' established views on characters. 6. Yes. Both Harry and the reader are mistaken about Riddle. This is one case - maybe the only one - where we are truly deceived. Think, the one true case where a person manages to seem good, and actually be evil is Voldemort. Does Voldemort represent humanity in general for JKR? Of course not. He represents the darkest and worst in humanity. So, showing Voldemort as a deceiver is certainly not a call (for us or for Harry) to generally distrust the impression we form of people. > Misconceptions of people abound in HP. No, you can't trust a first > impression of anyone, because the longer you give JKR, the more > she'll show you why your first impression just wasn't true. Really? Draco, Ron, Hermione, Neville, Hagrid, DD, MM, the Dursleys, Harry himself - how is our first impression of them not true? >.... I don't think we can take anyone in these books at > face value. JKR has proven time and time again that her story goes > much deeper than just "Snape hates Harry." Instead, it is "Snape > hates Harry *because*..." "Voldemort hates Muggles > *because*..." "Lupin can't find a job *because*..." > > And in each instance, the because is often far more intersting than > the fact which preceeds it. Again, getting additional information is a very different matter from getting contradicting information. Harry felt from the beginning that Snape hates him - and he was right. Does the fact that Snape hates Harry because of James makes Snape's unfair behavior not unfair? It gives Snape depth - it doesn't undermine our basic perception of the character as unfair, unpleasant, etc. The same goes for the other examples you give. > > Are these characters adequately known? Not by half! We don't know: > > > We're not even *close* to adequate yet. At least, not for me. When I said 'adequete', I meant that the basic knowledge we have of a character (mostly on the good/evil divide) is true. That doesn't mean we know every thing, or even every interesting thing about the character. The question is, whether the additional information we get will be, in some way, an extrapolation of what we already know, or that it will undermine, subvert what we knew (thought we knew, in this case). My argument is that JKR tends to develop her characters on a trajectory of their basic personality, which she mostly makes known to the reader early on. Naama From stevejjen at earthlink.net Thu Nov 25 15:19:55 2004 From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese) Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2004 15:19:55 -0000 Subject: Lupin's secrets was Re: Two Wormtails In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118563 Alla: > > Who knows, maybe Remus WAS approached by Voldemort agents for > > recruitment and maybe he agreed because Dumbledore asked him to. I > > just think that suspicion of him being a spy must have been based > on > > SOME mistake. Maybe James or Sirius witnessed remus meeting with > > suspicious people and mistrust went from there. Naama: > What I have to say relates both to Lupin being a possible spy within > the DEs group, and to Lupin being a spy within his own group (i.e., a > traitor): > > IT'S REDUNDANT!!!! > > Apologies for yelling. But really - this is not a spy novel, a Le > Carre type of story. What on earth would it add to the STORY to > have both Pettigrew and Lupin spies for Voldemort? Or both Snape > and Lupin spies for DD? Jen: Maybe, as Olivier pointed out in post 118561, we will never find out why James/Sirius suspected Lupin of being the spy in the Order. Perhaps Lupin's professional work after Hogwarts, and his work for the Order, will end up having no bearing on the rest of the story. But it's still interesting to speculate. And there is a mystery component this series, even as I don't believe this is ultimately a spy novel. Certainly both sides employ 'operatives' whose job it is to infiltrate enemy territory and report back information. We have numerous accounts of the DE's infiltrating the MOM. It's not beyond belief that Dumbledore also has agents who gather information for him, even if they don't personally become DE's to do so. But yes, most of our speculation *is* redundant at this point. Polyjuice, Imperio, traitors, Legilimency/Occlumency--all have been done before. Only the spells, situations, etc. JKR invents in future books, beyond our own imaginings at this point, will truly be *new*. Jen, who hopes for more information about Lupin. From nkafkafi at yahoo.com Thu Nov 25 15:48:01 2004 From: nkafkafi at yahoo.com (nkafkafi) Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2004 15:48:01 -0000 Subject: Two Wormtails was Re: Plot in OotP (wand confusion) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118564 > Pippin: > If you care to check back to message 40370, which was posted > in June of 2002 you will find Elkins discussing the idea of > whether Snape thought "Wormtail" was Sirius, ie the spy. > > It's not the original post on the subject (YahooMort was giving me > grief) but at least it proves that fans were already discussing this > notion, suggested by canon, a long time before JKR made that > statement. > > > As I said before, it was a solution to Snape's apparent > knowledge of the Marauder nicknames. > > If JKR *meant* the PoA passage as a clue that there was some > doubt about who was meant by "Wormtail" then her chat answer > gives those who have figured out that Wormtail is not necessarily > Peter a wink and a nod, while those who don't get it are no > further misled than they were before. > Neri : With your technique, any statement of JKR to the effect that "A is B" can be proved to mean that "A is NOT B!" For example, JKR wrote in her site that James and Lupin did not switch bodies before GH. I will now demonstrate how Pippin's technique can be used to prove that "James and Lupin did TOO switch bodies". The proof goes like this: (1) JKR is sneaky. (2) There was a speculation in the past that Lupin has a brother, Romulus Lupin. I assume that this speculation is indeed true (it certainly seems possible, even fitting, and there's no canon to disprove it). (3) When JKR wrote that James and Lupin did not switch bodies, she actually meant "James and ROMULUS Lupin did not switch bodies" (very sneakily she didn't mention the first name in her words!). This answer gives those readers who have figured out the existence of Romulus Lupin's a wink and a nod. (4) Knowing that JKR meant Romulus Lupin here, why did she make this statement? The only explanation is that she wants to throw the more gullible readers off the track, away from the TRUE plot... (5) Conclusion: James and REMUS Lupin did TOO switch bodies (Q.E.D.). An added bonus of the above reasoning is that I also proved the existence of Romulus Lupin. (If some members of this list will attack my reasoning here too fiercely, I might give ground just a bit and admit that maybe it is only POSSIBLE, not certain, that James and Lupin switched bodies). With this technique it is possible to prove that any statement of JKR actually means the opposite of what it says. The only step in the technique that is not automatic is (2), since we have to find some speculation suggesting that there is another character going by the name JKR used in her words. However, with over 100000 posts in HPfGU alone, probably raising any outlandish speculation one can think of, this will almost always be possible (although locating the original post might be difficult). I'm sure many list members will find this technique useful for their theorizing. I allow that it should be credited to Pippin, but I think I also deserve some credit for making it explicit an available to the public. Neri From cat_kind at yahoo.com Thu Nov 25 15:53:01 2004 From: cat_kind at yahoo.com (cat_kind) Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2004 15:53:01 -0000 Subject: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118565 > > Valky: > > The phrase "as though he had been expecting an attack" in no way > > leads to an assumption that james was still armed. > >snip > The attack was not obvious, James wand was not drawn or > > aimed. Of that I am entirely certain. > > Potioncat: > Just to clarify, James calls out "All right, Snivelus?" Do you think > Severus was wrong to go for his wand? Looking at the description of > Sirius and Peter, James was up to something, we can see it, and > Severus must have had reason to expect it. > > catkind: The way I read this scene, James and Sirius weren't planning a fight, they were planning a taunting session, a la Draco Malfoy/famille Dursley. Then they are pleased when Snape draws his wand because it gives them an excuse to use magic against him. Even more so when Snape gets his slashing-hex in. My impression was, if Snape hadn't gone for his wand, nor would James and Sirius have. Yes, it can also be read the other way: "All right, Snivellus?" calls James, to call Snape's attention to the wands pointing at him. My opinion: whichever way it happened, it doesn't change the fact that J&S are in the wrong. I always want to compare this scene to the scene where Draco first confronts Harry about Malfoy sr. being in prison, at the end of OotP: Harry is taunting Malfoy, basically, even though Malfoy "started it". Malfoy goes for his wand. Harry gets to his first. I wonder what would have happened next if Snape hadn't intervened. Judging by Harry's later actions, something pretty unpleasant would have happened to Malfoy at this point. The author seems to condemn James and Sirius' actions, but not to notice anything wrong with what Harry does to Malfoy in the various incidents in OotP. Is this something Harry hasn't noticed yet, or does Rowling really see a difference, a valid excuse for doing nasty things to Malfoy? Or is the Harry/Draco dynamic pure Tom-and-Jerry light relief, outside the moral framework? If "he started it" is a valid excuse, James and Sirius would have a valid excuse at least in my first reading. If "he's a nasty piece of work" is a valid excuse, you could say James and Sirius would have a valid excuse full stop. If "two against one" is what makes it wrong, what about Harry and twin/DA vs Draco/Draco and goons? I'd be interested in what people think about the relative seriousness of the offences "he insulted my parent/best mate/greasy nose", "he hexed me" and "he punched me" in this world. Otherwise it's hard to judge what is considered just retaliation for what and by whom. catkind From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Thu Nov 25 17:45:42 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2004 17:45:42 -0000 Subject: Pampering (was Re:Harry at the Dursleys) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118566 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "arrowsmithbt" wrote: >> I beg your pardon? > Do I understand you correctly? > > I really hope that I have misunderstood, that this is not the case, that you are not implying that the acceptability or otherwise of a member's theories is in your competence. Diversity of opinion is the life-blood of the site.The understanding of all who read the posting rules is that members are free, nay encouraged, to express views on canon, unpopular or not, irrespective of whether another member concurs with their opinion or not. If that understanding is in error, I want to know about it - now. Alla: You know what Kneasy, I have had it with public lecturing. YES, you did misunderstand me and grandly, at that. The poster who wrote the previous message seemed to be apologetic for the fact that she considers the Dursleys to be funny, while they are horrible . I was trying to support her, to tell her that it is normal to laugh at the characters, while we can also be disgusted at them. I was not ACCEPTING or JUDGJIN her theory, I was encouraging it. Do I have YOUR permission to proceed now? I would love to hear an apology , but I guess I should not be holding my breath. P.S. Apologies to the elves, I know I am going to get an e-mail, but I was insulted ON LIST and decided to reply on it. From carolynwhite2 at aol.com Thu Nov 25 18:03:31 2004 From: carolynwhite2 at aol.com (carolynwhite2) Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2004 18:03:31 -0000 Subject: Spy novel? maybe (was Lupin's secrets ) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118567 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "naamagatus" wrote: > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Sharon" wrote: > > Naama, previously: >> But really - this is not a spy novel, a Le Carre type of story. What on earth would it add to the STORY to have both Pettigrew and Lupin spies for Voldemort? Or both Snape and Lupin spies for DD? It makes sense when that's the focus of the tale - espionage, the shifting perception of reality, the inability to fully trust anyone. Surely it is clear that that is not what HP is about? These issues are minor, elements JKR uses to enhance the tension and pace of the story - but they are not what the story is *about*.<< Naama, in response to Azriona: >>I think you'd lose (as I said in my last) a driving force in the plot and the readability (the page-turner quality), but not so much in meaning.<< Carolyn: I think you've said it yourself, Naama. Losing the narrative drive in the books would change them completely. The central mystery that lies at the heart of the series is far from being a `minor element', it is what gives a rationale to all the characters' actions. And how can you derive any `meaning' from a book where you don't actually want to turn the pages ? You can have compelling tales that don't depend on plot, of course. The intense characterisation of novels by Henry James or Virginia Woolf are wonderful examples of books where events scarcely matter, but I hardly think that is what JKR is aspiring to. Instead, she has spent years devising a complex, intensely-plotted series, where the long-term motivations of many of the characters are currently far from clear, and may remain so even after Book 7. And I think you do spy novels (particularly Le Carre's) a great disservice if you think they are just about plot. In many ways, the point of many of them is that key plot resolutions can depend on the actions and relationships between just one or two people in the end. Think Smiley bringing in Karla. Just like HP, in fact. And we have been told quite clearly what it was like during VW1 ? Sirius tells HRH in GOF `You don't know who his supporters are, you don't know who's working for him and who isn't; you know he can control people so that they do terrible things without being able to stop themselves...Terror everywhere..panic..confusion..that's how it used to be.' Both Harry and the readers are given to understand that almost anyone could turn out to have done anything, whether they intended to or not. Naama: >>>JKR is simply not interested in the deep question of whether you can ever really know somebody else. She doesn't deal with it.<<< Carolyn: I would suggest that Dumbledore has made the study of Voldemort his life's work. Certainly the scene at the MoM suggests immense familiarity with Tom Riddle's thoughts, and an intimate understanding of how he is likely to act in any given situation. All of Dumbledore's actions throughout the series are driven by trying to second-guess Voldie and stay one jump ahead of him, to ensure Harry lives until he is ready for the final encounter. If you don't want to call it puppetmaster!DD, fine. But you can't argue by now that he doesn't have a plan. And for the warm-hearted, it's probably best not to dwell too long on chilling comments such as: `Well, Nicholas and I had a little chat and agreed it's all for the best' (ie `we thought it best that he died now') `He did not wish to tell me and I ? persuaded him ? to tell me the full story' (ie, DD somehow forced Kreacher to talk) Naama: >>Further, if we're talking ESE!Lupin theory, that would make half of Harry's father's group of best friends traitors. Again, not compatible with the underlying feel of the books that people, generally, are trustworthy.<<< >>>First, my argument is about the *general* trustworthiness of people in the Potterverse.<<< >>>My argument is that JKR tends to develop her characters on a trajectory of their basic personality, which she mostly makes known to the reader early on.<<< Carolyn: Why is it so important that the characterisation is trustworthy? Why shouldn't dear Harry get a nasty shock about one or two people? What's the problem with this? Happens all the time in RL. Maybe we are talking about the children/adult reader argument again? Mustn't alarm the kiddies, perhaps? Again, I say, why not? >From an adult reader's perspective, apart from agreeing with Azriona and many others on this list that JKR sets out to mislead us very deliberately, I also think it adds vastly to the entertainment. I don't have any problem at all with being led up the garden path, or failing in trying to second guess her. I think a more interesting question is whether the popularity of the books will survive long-term after the mystery is resolved. Here, it seems to me, there is a definite requirement for complexity, depth and unfinished business, to keep people arguing and interpreting for years to come. A simple, heroic boy's tale of growing up to win a fight against an evil baddie just won't cut the mustard, IMO. Carolyn From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Thu Nov 25 18:36:17 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2004 18:36:17 -0000 Subject: Harry at the Dursleys / DD's feelings about it In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118568 Geoff wrote : "This has just made me sit up and think. I've never made a connection with mollycoddling here but could this be another of JKR's tongue-in- cheek name jokes? Was Ron's mother called Molly to emphasise this?" Del replies : You hadn't realised it yet :-) ? I didn't know the word "mollycoddling" when I first met Molly. But when I discovered that word and figured its meaning, I immediately realised it was another name-joke on the part of JKR. But I guess it was easier for me. That's one of the rare advantages of having English as a second language : I can have a more distanced look on words. Del From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Thu Nov 25 19:19:42 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2004 19:19:42 -0000 Subject: Spy novel? maybe (was Lupin's secrets ) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118569 > Carolyn: snip. I think a more interesting question is whether the popularity of the books will survive long-term after the mystery is resolved. Here, it seems to me, there is a definite requirement for complexity, depth and unfinished business, to keep people arguing and interpreting for years to come. Alla: But do we need "unfinished business" in plot to keep talking about the books for the years to come after series are done? I submit that even if everything is unambiguously resolved at the end of the series (which I hope it will be), we still have characterisation, narrative technique, etc.,etc. to talk about it. Carolyn: > A simple, heroic boy's tale of growing up to win a fight against an evil baddie just won't cut the mustard, IMO. Alla: But it already does. If you are saying that without surprise characterisations of main characters (ESE!Lupin for example), it will not become a classic say hundred years from today, I think I disagree, From saraandra at saraandra.plus.com Thu Nov 25 19:41:50 2004 From: saraandra at saraandra.plus.com (amanitamuscaria1) Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2004 19:41:50 -0000 Subject: Harry at the Dursleys - Dumbledore's deal In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118570 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "kjirstem" wrote: > snippety snip snip > I mean, > really, who gives someone a tissue as a present? Most people seem to > think they are horrible, as I do too, but I also think they are > horribly funny. > > kjirstem - who once thought she had been given a *box* of tissues as a > gift... AmanitaMuscaria now - Hmmm - I once thought I'd been given a box of matches as a Christmas present ... But seriously, I believe that all the Dursley ludicrousness is to do with their keeping to 'Dumbledore's rules', without letting Harry enjoy himself. Why, indeed, would you give a child 1. a tissue 2.coathanger 3. old pair of socks 4. a 50 pence piece? Because you'd made a deal saying you _had_ to give the child presents - no stipulation on what they were. Why would you give a child cold tinned soup or 2 slices of bread and a chunk of cheese? Because you _had_ to feed the child, presumably 3 meals a day, without stipulation on what the food was. Why would you put the child in the cupboard under the stairs when you've got a couple of rooms hardly used? Because you _have_ to give the child a bed, no stipulation on where the bed is. Thus, also, the fact that they never physically abuse Harry - I don't think they can. When Vernon finally tries, he gets an electric jolt. I believe the converse of this deal is shown when Hagrid gives Dudley the pig's tail - I don't think he can touch Vernon and Petunia with magic. But they maybe didn't think to cover Dudley, just assumed he'd be under the protection as well. Whether the deal was done with Vernon and Petunia, or just Petunia, I'm pretty sure a deal was done hence the odd nature of the abuse of Harry. Cheers. AmanitaMuscaria From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Thu Nov 25 21:06:22 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2004 21:06:22 -0000 Subject: Spy novel? maybe (was Lupin's secrets ) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118571 Naama wrote : "When I said 'adequete', I meant that the basic knowledge we have of a character (mostly on the good/evil divide) is true. That doesn't mean we know every thing, or even every interesting thing about the character. The question is, whether the additional information we get will be, in some way, an extrapolation of what we already know, or that it will undermine, subvert what we knew (thought we knew, in this case). My argument is that JKR tends to develop her characters on a trajectory of their basic personality, which she mostly makes known to the reader early on. " Del replies : I would tend to agree, if it weren't for huge counter-examples like Riddle, and even more importantly, Peter Pettigrew. I think that with those two examples (among others), JKR has amply demonstrated that we simply cannot trust anyone. Peter was James', Sirius' and Remus' *intimate* friend. they had known him for years, they had gone through loads and loads of things with him, James trusted him with his very life and the life of his family, Sirius and Remus more readily suspected each other of betrayal than suspecting Peter. Even DD, with all his Legilimency and knowing people's characters, doesn't seem to have ever suspected Peter. Apparently, Peter was the last person on Earth anyone would have suspected of turning to LV. And yet he did. Not only that, but he managed to keep this betrayal hidden for an entire year ! I personally think that JKR set a very definite pattern of "Don't trust anyone !" throughout her books. In PS/SS, Harry discovers that he's not at all who he thought he was. He then discovers that he shouldn't take people at face value : Hermione and Neville, for example, both clearly show him that there's more to them than he first thought. And of course, there's the whole Snape vs. Quirrel affair. In CoS, Tom Riddle goes from perfect student and school hero to machiavelic monster. Ginny goes from annoying and very minor side character to crucial plot element. Same with Moaning Myrtle. Harry's funny little gift, Parseltongue, becomes absolutely central to the whole book. In PoA, Sirius and Peter both change from apparently being very definitely on one side of the good/evil line to actually being on the other side. Remus is revealed to be infinitely more than just a poor, chronically ill and sympathetic teacher. By the end of PoA, JKR has clearly taught us the "Don't trust anyone !" lesson. She then devises a test for us in GoF, in the character of Crouch!Moody, and we all (?) walked right into the trap. We hadn't learned our lesson. Then we go on to OoP, where Harry's previous knowledge about some very impportant things is attacked. His father was always a noble hero ? Nope. DD can be blindly trusted ? Nope. Harry can casually trust those who pretend to be on his side ? Nope (Marrietta). People who were once on Harry's side and who always belonged to the Good Group will undoubtedly remain so ? Nope (Percy). Worst of all : Harry can blindly trust himself ? Nope. It seems to me that having an intimate betrayal in one of the next books wouldn't be out of line. I'm not saying it's necessary, but IMO it really wouldn't be out of place. If anything, Peter's betrayal can be seen as a dark foreshadow. I just hope it's not Ron or Hermione, but they would be perfect candidates. Del From mgrantwich at yahoo.com Thu Nov 25 21:46:20 2004 From: mgrantwich at yahoo.com (Magda Grantwich) Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2004 13:46:20 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Spy novel? maybe (was Lupin's secrets ) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041125214620.11209.qmail@web53106.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 118572 --- delwynmarch wrote: > I would tend to agree, if it weren't for huge counter-examples like > Riddle, and even more importantly, Peter Pettigrew. I think that > with those two examples (among others), JKR has amply demonstrated > that we simply cannot trust anyone. I disagree. The examples you site (Peter, Riddle, Percy, et al) aren't a sign that Harry (and we)can't trust anyone but rather that but rather that Harry (and we) shouldn't assume we know a character based on superficial outward characteristics. That Percy would act the way he did at the start of OOTP (getting huffy about his parents' lack of support for his new job, moving out, rejecting CHristmas presents, etc.) should not have been a surprise to us if we really consider what he was like in earlier books and how his personality would react. That Peter betrayed the Potters and framed Sirius should not have been surprising had they really known him instead of assuming that they did. The signs were there, but James and Sirius interpreted them incorrectly, and paid for that mistake dearly. Had they really thought about it they'd have realized that Peter could not be trusted to resist more powerful individuals. It's not a matter of trust but rather not taking things for granted, not peaking behind the facade for the real person behind it. Magda __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Take Yahoo! Mail with you! Get it on your mobile phone. http://mobile.yahoo.com/maildemo From gbannister10 at aol.com Thu Nov 25 22:49:57 2004 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2004 22:49:57 -0000 Subject: Mollycoddling (was Re: Harry at the Dursleys / DD's feelings about it) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118573 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "delwynmarch" wrote: > > Geoff wrote : > "This has just made me sit up and think. I've never made a connection > with mollycoddling here but could this be another of JKR's tongue- in- > cheek name jokes? Was Ron's mother called Molly to emphasise this?" Del: > You hadn't realised it yet :-) ? > > I didn't know the word "mollycoddling" when I first met Molly. But > when I discovered that word and figured its meaning, I immediately > realised it was another name-joke on the part of JKR. > > But I guess it was easier for me. That's one of the rare advantages of > having English as a second language : I can have a more distanced look > on words. Geoff: It's not a word I use often. But I have to admit that sometimes we native English speakers do not necessarily stop to analyse the etymology of words which we use. I can think of one common English word for which the derivation never occurred to me until I was looking at its equivalent in German. Interestingly, I followed this up and found that (1) Molly is a pet form of Mary but also, (2) in the analysis of "mollycoddle", the first part of this is given as a word for "girl". Geoff http://www.aspectsofexmoor.com From gbannister10 at aol.com Thu Nov 25 22:58:40 2004 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2004 22:58:40 -0000 Subject: Harry's developing behaviour - average or unique? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118574 I often wonder whether it reflects the demographic structure of HPFGU but to me it is noticeable that threads regarding Harry's development and the question of boys' behaviour seem largely to be posed and answered by women members of the group. As a result, I sometimes feel that this puts a wrong spin on the matter because looking at the matter from my perspective, I feel that wrong conclusions are drawn as to whether Harry's behaviour is fairly normal or unique to him. What is my perspective? Firstly and obviously I am a male and was a teenager some little time ago (my current age being 21+). Additionally, I have had a great deal of experience dealing with young people. For over 30 years I taught in South London at the same school. Over the years it moved from being an 11+ to 16 boys' school to a 13+ to 18 mixed and then finally to a 12+ to 16 mixed so I was dealing with teenagers for my entire professional career. I also have three children, now grown up, of whom two are male and, although I took early retirement several years ago, my wife and I still work with teenagers in our church Boys' Club. So, is Harry's journey from 11 to nearly 16 unusual? Is the move from "Too Good" Harry to CapsLock!Harry a reasonable progression? And do we expect him to calm down and become pleasanter after this? I would say yes and want to set out comparisons between Harry's progress and that of a typical real world guy. We meet Harry as a na?ve, uncertain 11 year old in 1991. At that time, many boys of that age would be in the same situation. Up to that age, their thinking had been very much guided by their family; they usually conformed to the structure of the family. Boys of that age still see the world very much in black and white; things are good or bad. I remember, when my school was about to change from 11+ intake to a 13 year old intake, having a conversation with my Headmaster, who was a very wise old bird ? definitely in the Dumbledore mould. I said that I could see potential problems with boys coming in at Third Year level because we usually gained the loyalty and support of the First Years without any hassle but I could anticipate that, being two years older, they would probably be more streetwise and likely to question what was going on. My headmaster's perceptive comment about the First Year boys was something like "True. When they are at the age of 11, they haven't lost their sense of wonderment or magic." In my opinion therefore, Harry was not unusual at this age. He was quiet and reserved, not many close friends. So was I. I was a bit of a swot; I enjoyed finding out about things and wasn't particularly athletic. Harry also wasn't completely angelic. Although he kept his head down, metaphorically and physically, at Privet Drive, he obviously had his views which were sometimes a little "wicked". We see him in PS thinking of Dudley as a pig in a wig and he allowed himself to visualise Dudley resembling one of the gorillas at the Zoo. When he is annoyed or stressed, his wandless reflex magic surfaces from time to time. In COS, he has great fun frightening Dudley with his wand and he certainly produces a couple of sarcastic replies for Aunt Marge in POA. So there is certainly a spark present waiting to be triggered off! What about him in OOTP? I said earlier that at 11, things are black and white. It is as we approach our teens that the grey areas begin to creep in. People we have looked up to as marvellous ? maybe even parents or grandparents ? suddenly have occasions when they let us down, embarrass us and try to continue directing our lives as they did when we were younger. Teens want room to flex their muscles ? physically, behaviourally and socially ? and like to spend time pushing at the barriers and seeing if they can be prised open a little further. And with it can come the tempers and the outbursts. I know about that ? I had red hair (then!). Both my sons went through spells like this in their mid-teens. My elder son was dreadful; we didn't dare take him anywhere. He was angry, moody, sullen and anti- social. Today, he is happily married and working towards a doctorate in Theology as a mature student. My younger son lived on a short fuse for years (as did our nerves). Something would displease him and there would be a minor volcanic eruption. He would address us in capital letters and then stomp off to his room; you could tell by the diminishing sounds of doors being slammed hard where he was. He is now a highly-paid computer consultant used to making measured decisions for companies. OK, so Harry had extra reasons for blowing his top over and above the usual pressures of adolescence but much of what he does and thinks are in part the normal behaviour and development of average teenage males. Will Harry revert to being like he was before his outburst years? No. But he will return to being more civilised. He will not return to the unquestioning and na?ve Harry of 11 but he will be the experienced and worldy-wise Harry of 17 or 18 growing into adulthood. This is how it works out in the real world and I see this as being the same for the Wizarding World. Let's stop trying to label Harry as a freak and consider him as a normal teenager for whom the screw has been turned a notch or so tighter than normal. Geoff http://www.aspectsofexmoor.com From naama_gat at hotmail.com Thu Nov 25 23:01:03 2004 From: naama_gat at hotmail.com (naamagatus) Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2004 23:01:03 -0000 Subject: Spy novel? maybe (was Lupin's secrets ) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118575 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "carolynwhite2" wrote: > > > Carolyn: > I think you've said it yourself, Naama. Losing the narrative drive in > the books would change them completely. The central mystery that lies > at the heart of the series is far from being a `minor element', it is > what gives a rationale to all the characters' actions. And how can > you derive any `meaning' from a book where you don't actually want to > turn the pages ? But I'm not talking about the central mystery. I am talking about the minor mysteries - the more whodunnit type of mysteries that form the nexus of each book. Obviously, if we didn't have these local mysteries, each individual book would be much less interesting - but they have little to do with the central mystery of the relationship between Voldemort and Harry. And this mystery is not at all of the whodunnit type. It goes deeper, and is more closely related to theme (love? power of good? power of evil? etc.) than to plot. At least, that's my understanding of the series' structure. > > And I think you do spy novels (particularly Le Carre's) a great > disservice if you think they are just about plot. In many ways, the > point of many of them is that key plot resolutions can depend on the > actions and relationships between just one or two people in the end. > Think Smiley bringing in Karla. Just like HP, in fact. On the contrary, I didn't mean that spy novels are only about plot. I think the spy novel genre (like any genre) can be used to explore various themes and deeper questions. *Such as* the opaqueness of one human being to another; the question of whether it is possible to know a person truly, whether there even *is* such a thing a stable self (i.e., a set of stable personality traits). In saying that JKR isn't writing a spy novel, I'm not belittling the genre. Just that, if she isn't, then it doesn't make sense, *thematically*, for her to dwell so much on such issues - as required for ESE!Lupin, PuppetMaster!DD theories. > > And we have been told quite clearly what it was like during VW1 ? > Sirius tells HRH in GOF `You don't know who his supporters are, you > don't know who's working for him and who isn't; you know he can > control people so that they do terrible things without being able to > stop themselves...Terror everywhere..panic..confusion..that's how it > used to be.' > > Both Harry and the readers are given to understand that almost anyone > could turn out to have done anything, whether they intended to or not. The question is not whether there are spies and traitors. We know there are - Pettigrew and Snape are both double agents (well, Snape probably). But how important are these aspects of the struggle against Voldemort within the story? Is there much weight in the story to inherent suspicion of anybody and everybody as possible spies/traitors? This connects back to my original point, that JKR is not writing a spy novel. Although these aspects exist in the story, they are not it's focus. > > Naama: > >>>JKR is simply not interested in the deep question of whether you > can ever really know somebody else. She doesn't deal with it.<<< > > Carolyn: > I would suggest that Dumbledore has made the study of Voldemort his > life's work. Certainly the scene at the MoM suggests immense > familiarity with Tom Riddle's thoughts, and an intimate understanding > of how he is likely to act in any given situation. All of > Dumbledore's actions throughout the series are driven by trying to > second-guess Voldie and stay one jump ahead of him, to ensure Harry > lives until he is ready for the final encounter. > > If you don't want to call it puppetmaster!DD, fine. But you can't > argue by now that he doesn't have a plan. And for the warm-hearted, > it's probably best not to dwell too long on chilling comments such as: > > `Well, Nicholas and I had a little chat and agreed it's all for the > best' (ie `we thought it best that he died now') > > `He did not wish to tell me and I ? persuaded him ? to tell me the > full story' (ie, DD somehow forced Kreacher to talk) Never chilled me for a moment, either of these comments, sorry. As for DD trying to second- guess Voldemort - I really don't see what that has to do with puppetmaster!DD, which, as I understand it, involves DD manipulating practically everybody around him (friends, colleagues and Harry) in order to achieve the desirable goal. Also, I don't get how what you say here replies to my comment that JKR doesn't deal with the question of whether we can ever really know somebody? > > > Naama: > >>Further, if we're talking ESE!Lupin theory, that would make half of > Harry's father's group of best friends traitors. Again, not > compatible with the underlying feel of the books that people, > generally, are trustworthy.<<< > > >>>First, my argument is about the *general* trustworthiness of > people in the Potterverse.<<< > > >>>My argument is that JKR tends to develop her characters > on a trajectory of their basic personality, which she mostly makes > known to the reader early on.<<< > > > Carolyn: > Why is it so important that the characterisation is trustworthy? Why > shouldn't dear Harry get a nasty shock about one or two people? > What's the problem with this? Happens all the time in RL. I have no problem with it at all. It's *JKR* who has a problem with it is my point. > > Maybe we are talking about the children/adult reader argument again? > Mustn't alarm the kiddies, perhaps? Again, I say, why not? Not at all. It's not about my preferences - it's about what I understand to be contained in the text itself: Characters are generally stable; the story is not focused on questioning the possiblity of true perception of others, etc. > > From an adult reader's perspective, apart from agreeing with Azriona > and many others on this list that JKR sets out to mislead us very > deliberately, I also think it adds vastly to the entertainment. I > don't have any problem at all with being led up the garden path, or > failing in trying to second guess her. But what types of misleading does JKR use? If you actually look at the story, as I tried to show, case by case, in my previous post, she doesn't tend to mislead through presenting us with a character that is of quality x, and then showing us that he is really of quality y. Durselys, Malfoys, Snape are presented from the very beginning as nasty, and continue being nasty the whole way through. Ron, Hermione, Neville (and Harry), Weasleys - nice, and continue being nice, and so on and so on. Other than Tom Riddle (and possibly Quirrel - although he was possessed by Voldemort, so Harry and we have never really met the real Quirrel) who has JKR mislead us about in this way? > > I think a more interesting question is whether the popularity of the > books will survive long-term after the mystery is resolved. Here, it > seems to me, there is a definite requirement for complexity, depth > and unfinished business, to keep people arguing and interpreting for > years to come. > > A simple, heroic boy's tale of growing up to win a fight against an > evil baddie just won't cut the mustard, IMO. Of course it won't. But why does the mustard have to be cut via a strained, incredibly intricate and fiddly plot twist? Naama From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Thu Nov 25 23:02:08 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2004 23:02:08 -0000 Subject: Spy novel? maybe (was Lupin's secrets ) In-Reply-To: <20041125214620.11209.qmail@web53106.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118576 Magda Grantwich wrote: "I disagree. The examples you site (Peter, Riddle, Percy, et al) aren't a sign that Harry (and we)can't trust anyone but rather that but rather that Harry (and we) shouldn't assume we know a character based on superficial outward characteristics. " Del replies : Hu, sure, but how deeply do we and Harry really know anyone ? For example, can Harry safely presume that he knows Ron and Hermione deeply enough to trust them ? How deep does "superficial" go ? To put it in toned-down terms, I think that JKR has amply demonstrated that we don't know any character deeply enough to presume we know them enough and conclude they can't betray Harry at one time or another. The only character we really know is Harry. All other characters, we (and Harry) know only from the outside. Magda Grantwich wrote : " That Percy would act the way he did at the start of OOTP (getting huffy about his parents' lack of support for his new job, moving out, rejecting CHristmas presents, etc.) should not have been a surprise to us if we really consider what he was like in earlier books and how his personality would react. " Del replies : Yes and no. If we had discussed such a chain of events as the one that happened in GoF and OoP, then maybe we could have reached the conclusion that the probability of Percy reacting the way he did was pretty high. But how could we ever have predicted such a thing : Percy getting a job at the MoM as assistant to a head of department, his boss getting Imperioed, Percy filling in without alerting his superiors (and filling well enough that his superiors didn't worry about the situation sooner), his boss getting killed, Percy going through an enquiry, DD becoming an enemy to the Minister, Fudge becoming paranoid, Arthur becoming suspect of disloyalty to the Ministry, Percy being offered a job with the Minister, and Arthur telling him right away that Fudge's only intent was to use him as a spy on DD ? It's not just Percy's personality : it's also the circumstances. Had the Graveyeard Scene happened a year earlier, when Percy was still in school and his idol was still DD, before he had time to shift his loyalty from DD to Fudge, things would probably have turned completely differently. There's a saying in French : l'occasion fait le larron. The opportunity makes the thief. People can have personality traits that predispose them to some reactions, but they need to be put in an occasion where those traits are called for, for those reactions to happen. For example : Peter couldn't have betrayed James and Lily, if he hadn't been made Secret-Keeper. Crouch Jr couldn't have taken Moody's place at Hogwarts if he hadn't been alive and freed from his father's control, and if Moody hadn't been hired as a teacher in Hogwarts. Crouch Jr couldn't have been alive and free if Bertha Jorkins hadn't visited while his father was gone and heard Winky talking to him, and if Bertha hadn't gone to Albania and met Peter who then brought her to LV, and if LV hadn't broken through the Memory Charm Crouch Sr had put on her. Peter wouldn't have gone to Albania if the incredible chain of events known as PoA hadn't happened (among other things : the Weasley's family winning a prize and getting their picture taken, Fudge visiting Azkaban with precisely the edition of the Daily Prophet containing that picture, Sirius seeing it, the Twins giving the Marauders' Map to Harry, Hermione buying Crookshanks, the Shrieking Shack events happening on a full moon night, Lupin forgetting to take his potion, Snape bringing it to him, and so on). Harry couldn't be a hero if he had no enemies to fight and people to save. In short : it's not just the personality, it's also the opportunity. And we simply don't know what opportunities all the HP characters have been offered or will be offered. Added to the fact that we don't even know much about the deep personality of many of them, I think it's not such a huge leap to make, to say that we can't really trust any of them. Del From gbannister10 at aol.com Thu Nov 25 23:11:59 2004 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2004 23:11:59 -0000 Subject: Spy novel? maybe (was Lupin's secrets ) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118577 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "naamagatus" wrote: Carolyn: > > I think a more interesting question is whether the popularity of the > > books will survive long-term after the mystery is resolved. Here, it > > seems to me, there is a definite requirement for complexity, depth > > and unfinished business, to keep people arguing and interpreting for > > years to come. > > > > A simple, heroic boy's tale of growing up to win a fight against an > > evil baddie just won't cut the mustard, IMO. Naama: > Of course it won't. But why does the mustard have to be cut via a strained, incredibly > intricate and fiddly plot twist? Geoff: I can think of a simple, heroic hobbit's tale of growing up to win a fight against an evil baddie has kept people arguing and interpreting for many years..... Perhaps I am just a simple minded person who likes a good story without analysing every syllable of every sentence? From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Thu Nov 25 23:43:08 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2004 23:43:08 -0000 Subject: Spy novel? maybe (was Lupin's secrets ) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118578 Naama wrote : "Obviously, if we didn't have these local mysteries, each individual book would be much less interesting - but they have little to do with the central mystery of the relationship between Voldemort and Harry. And this mystery is not at all of the whodunnit type. It goes deeper, and is more closely related to theme (love? power of good? power of evil? etc.) than to plot. At least, that's my understanding of the series' structure." Del replies : You might be right. But the truth is : we don't know. You might be right, but you might also be wrong. We know very little about the real relationship between Harry and LV. Naama wrote : "In saying that JKR isn't writing a spy novel, I'm not belittling the genre. Just that, if she isn't, then it doesn't make sense, *thematically*, for her to dwell so much on such issues - as required for ESE!Lupin, PuppetMaster!DD theories." Del replies : Agreed. But JKR has already put some elements of spy novels in the HP series (traitors, double agents, secret plans...), so we don't know how important those elements will be in the next books. Will their importance decrease, or will it dramatically increase ? Naama wrote : " The question is not whether there are spies and traitors. We know there are - Pettigrew and Snape are both double agents (well, Snape probably). But how important are these aspects of the struggle against Voldemort within the story? Is there much weight in the story to inherent suspicion of anybody and everybody as possible spies/traitors? This connects back to my original point, that JKR is not writing a spy novel. Although these aspects exist in the story, they are not it's focus. " Del replies : The whole series is born out of the betrayal of a double agent. I would say this points to the possibility that spies and traitors might yet play other big parts. Naama wrote : " It's not about my preferences - it's about what I understand to be contained in the text itself: Characters are generally stable; the story is not focused on questioning the possiblity of true perception of others, etc. " Del replies : I disagree. In every book, Harry keeps learning that some people are not completely what he thinks they are. Naama wrote : "But what types of misleading does JKR use? If you actually look at the story, as I tried to show, case by case, in my previous post, she doesn't tend to mislead through presenting us with a character that is of quality x, and then showing us that he is really of quality y. Durselys, Malfoys, Snape are presented from the very beginning as nasty, and continue being nasty the whole way through. Ron, Hermione, Neville (and Harry), Weasleys - nice, and continue being nice, and so on and so on. Other than Tom Riddle (and possibly Quirrel - although he was possessed by Voldemort, so Harry and we have never really met the real Quirrel) who has JKR mislead us about in this way? " Del replies : The trick is that many characters are rather stable, but not all. The Dursleys and the Malfoys are stable baddies for example, but Snape is not. He wasn't after the Philosophical Stone, he wasn't trying to kill Harry, he didn't remain a DE until LV's fall, he took great risks to help DD, he is a member of the Order. The very reason that Snape is such a popular character is because he seems completely unstable. On the good side, Ron, Hermione, Neville and Harry seem like stable characters. But we learned in OoP that the Weasleys are unstable as an entity : Percy is a wild card, we still don't know which way he will definitely turn. I guess this is why ESE!Lupin is such an attractive theory : because Lupin seems to be the epitome of the stable good guy, but there are little tidbits that don't seem to add up. Just like there were little tidbits that didn't seem to add up in Peter's actions, and they should have raised suspicions. Naama wrote : " But why does the mustard have to be cut via a strained, incredibly intricate and fiddly plot twist?" Del replies : Why not ? That's the incredible fun of discussing a work in progress : you can cut your mustard nicely, others can cut it via a nearly-impossible way, and yet others can choose anything in-between. We can pick and choose any way we like, and we can even choose several ways at a time. Del From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Fri Nov 26 00:32:19 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2004 00:32:19 -0000 Subject: Harry's developing behaviour - average or unique? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118579 Geoff: snip. >Will Harry revert to being like he was before his outburst years? No. But he will return to being more civilised. He will not return to the unquestioning and na?ve Harry of 11 but he will be the experienced and worldy-wise Harry of 17 or 18 growing into adulthood. This is how it works out in the real world and I see this as being the same for the Wizarding World. Let's stop trying to label Harry as a freak and consider him as a normal teenager for whom the screw has been turned a notch or so tighter than normal. Alla: Geoff, this was beatiful, thank you. Except being a 21+ woman, I agree with every word of your post. I see Harry's behaviour as absolutely normal for teenager and believe that he will outgrew his outbursts. I just hope that even when Harry stops being an Angry!Harry most of his time, JKR will still allow him to keep his temper and to scream SOMETIMES at people who deserve it, just because it is fun to read. From stonehenge.orders at verizon.net Thu Nov 25 19:01:48 2004 From: stonehenge.orders at verizon.net (kjirstem) Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2004 19:01:48 -0000 Subject: Pampering (was Re:Harry at the Dursleys) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118580 > > Kneasy wrote: > >> I beg your pardon? > > Do I understand you correctly? > > > > > I really hope that I have misunderstood, that this is not the > case, that you are not implying that the acceptability or otherwise > of a member's theories is in your competence. > Diversity of opinion is the life-blood of the site.The > understanding > of all who read the posting rules is that members are free, nay > encouraged, to express views on canon, unpopular or not, > irrespective of whether another member concurs > with their opinion or not. If that understanding is in error, I > want to know about it - now. > > > Alla: > > You know what Kneasy, I have had it with public lecturing. > > YES, you did misunderstand me and grandly, at that. The poster who > wrote the previous message seemed to be apologetic for the fact > that she considers the Dursleys to be funny, while they are >horrible. > kjirstem: Ummm. I'm glad someone read my post.... I'm a little embarrassed that there is discussion of my tone. I promise to try to be totally unapologetic in the future - not likely to happen though since I have a fatal attraction to the word "sorry". One of the ideas that I was trying to express is that I read the Dursley's as a bit of a parody. I was concerned that this might further incite the abuse thread since some people appear to feel strongly about the Dursley's behavior toward Harry. I'm not interested in joining in that discussion myself because, to me, they are not to be believed. Hopefully this is enough on topic for the list-elves, since I am still moderated. kjirstem From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Fri Nov 26 00:57:03 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2004 00:57:03 -0000 Subject: Harry's developing behaviour - average or unique? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118581 Alla wrote : "I just hope that even when Harry stops being an Angry!Harry most of his time, JKR will still allow him to keep his temper and to scream SOMETIMES at people who deserve it, just because it is fun to read." Del replies : I hope that JKR will allow other people to scream at Harry when he deserves it. And by people, I mean important people, people we care about, not overly unpopular people like Snape and Phineas Nigellus. That would be fun for me to read. Del From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Fri Nov 26 01:03:16 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2004 01:03:16 -0000 Subject: Harry's developing behaviour - average or unique? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118582 > Del replies : > I hope that JKR will allow other people to scream at Harry when he > deserves it. And by people, I mean important people, people we care > about, not overly unpopular people like Snape and Phineas Nigellus. > That would be fun for me to read. Alla: Yes, sure, why not? Let others scream at Harry to when he deserves it, I think though that other adults (if you mean them by "people we care about") will be VERY unlikely to scream at Harry any time soon,even when he deserves it, since they (especially Dumbledore) may have a guilty conscience as to how they treated him in OOP. From ryokas at hotmail.com Fri Nov 26 01:11:06 2004 From: ryokas at hotmail.com (kizor0) Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2004 01:11:06 -0000 Subject: W6 - a low-grade essay about weapons of wizard war Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118583 This is a pretty short thing. I have intentions of expanding and refining it later. I'll post the later versions here, unless enough people tell me not to. Got your own suggestions or ideas? Please tell them. Wondrous and Wicked Ways of Waging Wizarding War Making up and fleshing out fictional worlds has long been a favourite activity of mine. As I also happen to be a twisted *******, I've lately been giving what we might get to see in the struggle against Voldemort a lot of thought. Thus, I present to you a short speculative essay about possible ways to utilise magic in war for no good reason whatsoever. Seriously. I have at least three ongoing assignments that could have used the time, what's wrong with me? Someone who has actual knowledge of military matters instead of the general background kind that aspiring polymathy brings would undoubtedly get a lot more out of this issue. But he or she is not writing this. ----------- The Premise It's quite clear that the war will not be a military campaign in the Muggle sense of the word. Even if the wizarding world was unconcerned with revealing itself, it'd still lack the required numbers. The Order of the Phoenix was operating with less than twenty-five people during the first war. Guerrilla war and small precision strikes will be the order of the day, then, instead of a `grab a rifle and go get shot' grinder. The preciousness of manpower and the planned nature of conflicts means that in most engagements, at least one side will have had the chance to pre-prepare and arm itself with whatever aides are at hand. And there will be aides at hand; while a wizard only needs his wand to become an effective fighter, the potential in the myriad kinds of enchanted items is obvious. In addition to casting spells for temporary effects, wizards and witches are capable of imbuing objects with magical capabilities. As JKR appears to be deliberately avoiding technical details on magic, there are too many variables to estimate the extent of the possibilities. These include the skills and time required, the difficulty of the act and the time the enhancements would hold. Nevertheless, the setting is crowded with magical items, so they don't appear too hard to make and anyone trying to create new things would have ample materials available. It's quite possible that the WW, less acquainted with war, will not recognize some of the available potential ? though on the other hand, the previous war taught it some hard lessons. The strongest point about the non-existence of aides is the battle in the Department of Mysteries, a genuine magical battle that only used wands. My feeble defence is that two of the three groups involved scrambled immediately, as in every second counts, while the Death Eaters were going against a group of young teenagers with the advantage of surprise and two-on-one numbers. Why should they have armed themselves for definite overkill? In addition, many of the possible items are not immediately obvious. ----------- Some Possibilities Drones A personal favourite of mine and a fancy name for what are essentially enchanted lumps of rock, wood etc., drones are small spheres of any suitable material capable of homing and of maintaining and steering flight. Fred and George have used these on several occasions, such as when they made some snowballs rap on the windows of Gryffindor Tower, so the concept seems feasible and not too hard to put into action. A flying ball is not very useful on its own, but with additional enhancements (which is possible, as Quidditch balls kindly demonstrate) drones can quickly become tools that only wands outdo in versatility. I'll go through some of the concepts that have occurred to me. - Offensive drones: While drones cannot have spell-casting abilities on their own, a bit of improvisational nastiness can supply a number of other possible attacks. Take gobstones ? how about filling the stones with a severely caustic substance and setting them to spew it on the opponent's faces? A more straightforward way would be making what basically is a rogue Bludger (or indeed turning a regular one into one), a large, hard ball that continuously homes in on one person at high speeds. Offensive drones might not be as effective as wand-use, but even if heavy specialization can't fix that their autonomous nature would present the target with several attackers at once ? drones just need to be effective enough to force anyone on the wrong end to divide their attention. - Defensive drones: While no magical means can stop an Avada Kedavra, the spell has been absorbed by another object on a number of occasions. Drones that stay close to the user and throw themselves to the path of incoming curses could be a tremendous asset. In addition, drones orbiting the user like Magneto's from the second X-Men movie would just look too darn cool. - Intel drones: Stick a piece of the kind of mirror-glass Sirius used on a drone, or install sensor-equivalents and a transmitter using whatever the Wizarding Radio Network does, and voila! You have a scout or a sentinel. Scouts would have to be used carefully to avoid giving away one's position, but the ability to recon suspected ambushes and the like without exposing anyone to danger can be very valuable. The Uses of Near-Instantaneous Travel Apparating for short distances and Portkeys for long ones allow travel with neglible delay. Presumably it's still a second or few, making the methods unusable in battle (otherwise, I for one would not have barged to the Death Room through a door but Apparated two feet above Lucius Malfoy's head with steel boots) with the possible exception of fleeing. Portkeys do present an intriguing possibility; Key rings. Give Order operatives a set of a few Portkeys to Grimmauld Place and other strategic locations. When contacted (the Order members are very likely to have instantaneous communication, at least on a summoning level ? Hermione Granger was able to emulate the Dark Mark on her fifth year, NEWT level or no) all available Order members could reach into a pocket, unwrap the appropriate Key and arrive on the scene within seconds. Patrols, sentries and spies could also find Key rings a lifesaver ? doubly so if one would lead to St. Mungo. The fact against this is the low number of Order members present at the Department of Mysteries. No Snape, no Weasleys. In addition, the Key rings would have to be safeguarded against capture very throughoutly indeed. An Imperio on an owner would be bad, too. There are means of preventing the use of these methods, as Dumbledore's Anti-Disapparation Jinx in OOTP and Hogwarts' protections show. I imagine the Order and the Ministry will be using them a lot. No doubt the Death Eaters will, if possible, devise a system with about the same effects as the one in this Schlock Mercenary strip: http://www.schlockmercenary.com/d/20020220.html Please ignore the eye-trees and the amorphs, it'll be much easier for us both. The presence of loopholes bears watching, as it could undermine even the strongest of defenses. How about portable fireplaces for Floo travel, shrunken with appropriate magic and carried in a solid metal container to prevent unauthorized exits? Oh, and I would like to heartily thank the person who previously suggested a Knight Bus filled with Phoenix-wielding House Elves. You rule. Command Centers The wizarding world has the means to make a center of operations at least as advanced as the Muggle world. As the Weasley's wonderful watches show, items can be made to show a faraway person's status without delay. Sirius' mirror demonstrates that communication between distant persons is possible ? perhaps hearing crystals small enough to insert into an ear? We don't know how hard it was to make the Marauder's Map and how much did the makers have to know about Hogwarts, but having a Phoenix's Parchment of at least some important locations sounds likely. Ask Harry for the Map for the war effort (could he refuse?) and use an Engorgement Charm on it, and you already have one of Hogwarts. Imagine a room in Grimmauld Place decorated with pictures of Order members. A large parchment covers much of one wall, and small dots of red and green dash around on it. Mirrors show pictures of rooms filled with the fires of battle. Moody and Lupin sit behind desks, shouting into what vaguely resemble speaking tubes. The frames of several pictures are glowing red, and spell names flash on them. First one, and then another dims, and then `AVADA KEDAVRA' appears on one in fiery letters. The portrait catches fire. I know the small numbers make large-scale battles very rare, but the example works. You can add a shrunken Kreacher head to the ceiling if you like. Contact Lenses How small and precise can magic be? Presumably nanotech is out, but adding some enhancements to a contact lens or making a very thin, transparent film to wrap itself over an eyeball (yuk!) might be in the realms of possibility. The lens or equivalent could bestow sight enhancements or show data. Possible uses include projecting things such as an overhead map of the area on the lens. Furthermore, if the principles behind Weasley's other watch, the one that shows things like "You're late" without any apparent knowledge what the person in question is late for, are flexible enough ? these could show status reports, such as "You're in danger of being detected" or "duck!" Lenses could help in communication with a command center, as described above, and perhaps transmit what they see to the center. If contact lenses are too small, well, that brings a rather unpleasant mental image of Order members tearing one of their own eyes out and replacing them with their own versions of Moody's. Having a freaky-looking face beats being a good-looking corpse. With wizard medicine, it's very likely that the eyes could be preserved and rather replaced anyhow. Space-warping As cauldrons, cars and tents show, an object's size is no indication of the volume of space it holds. This removes much of the restrictions the size and weight of wargear places, and offers the chance of high-risk infiltration missions ? if the effects are strong enough, one person can carry many in concealment. ----------- Other Notes Why no Muggle weaponry? The ignorance about Muggle firearms and demolitions seems to be almost complete. Although the incredible versatility of a wand has them beat, they do have things that wizard weaponry doesn't; great fire rates and area effect, for instance. Wizards may have some kind of spell that makes Muggle projectile weapons infeasible, but even so it seems that a few flashbangs (concussion grenades; temporarily blind and deafen the enemy while causing no permanent damage) in the DoM would have been a great asset. Perhaps the knowledge of the Muggle weaponry's potential has not gotten to the leaders, as few of the senior fighters are likely to have any sort of expertise on the issue. The DE's racist policies are seemingly against this, but Voldemort's hypocricy would undoubtedly find a way around. The users would just have to be trained enough to operate the devices for one engagement, with one or two able people in charge of maintenance. Then again, the ignorance about Muggle things could be a blessing, otherwise we might end up with a government installation that until recently housed a nuclear warhead and is currently housing a lot of dead people who appear unharmed in any way, and a great big hole in Scotland. Operation: Human Shield How's this for vile? The Death Eaters attack a disco, school or other suitable establishment and Imperio the large amounts of children or adolescents there, then pass out AK-47s. Even if Aurors and the Order can hex themselves to be impervious to bullets, a properly timed attack with a group like this would at the very least be a great drain on time and resources. The best part is that the Ministry would be forced to cover the event up! Just leave them something to build a plausible scenario on ? say, order a few of the youths to remain in the building and blow the place up. From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Fri Nov 26 01:14:26 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2004 01:14:26 -0000 Subject: Pampering (was Re:Harry at the Dursleys) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118584 Kjirstem wrote : "One of the ideas that I was trying to express is that I read the Dursley's as a bit of a parody. I was concerned that this might further incite the abuse thread since some people appear to feel strongly about the Dursley's behavior toward Harry. I'm not interested in joining in that discussion myself because, to me, they are not to be believed." Del replies : In the first books at least, the Dursleys were quite obviously a parody element. The first chapters of the first book are absolutely hilarious in my idea. I remember how my friends and I laughed our heads off when reading them aloud in English class. Up until OoP, the Dursley scenes were awfully funny for me. I re-read the beginning of GoF the other day, and the episode with the grapefruit quarters, and how Aunt Petunia still tries to make Dudley feel better by giving Harry a smaller quarter, that just cracks me up ! And then, things changed in OoP. The Dursleys suddenly seemed to become real people, Dementors haunt the neighbourhood, Harry starts bullying Dudley, Uncle Vernon tries to strangle Harry and gets shocked, and Aunt Petunia knows about the Dementors and receives a Howler. Things aren't fun anymore. So of course now, we're forced to consider the Dursleys like real people, and the way they treated Harry becomes very real abuse. It doesn't make sense to me because, just like you Kjirstem, I never really considered the Dursleys to be real people. But hey, it's JKR's story, she can take it wherever she wants. We readers are not forced to follow all the way, though. For now, I'm still happier with Parody!Dursleys. Del From Aisbelmon at hotmail.com Fri Nov 26 01:13:56 2004 From: Aisbelmon at hotmail.com (M.Clifford) Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2004 01:13:56 -0000 Subject: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118585 > > Valky: > > The phrase "as though he had been expecting an attack" in no way > > leads to an assumption that james was still armed. Valky Now: First a typo correction. The above should read '...in no way leads to an assumption that James was *already* armed....' Not "still", sorry my Oops. Now to the conversation. > > Potioncatwrote: > Just to clarify, James calls out "All right, Snivelus?" Do you think Severus was wrong to go for his wand? Valky: I think the sentence suggests that from the Narrators POV Severus' reaching for his wand was a surprise, an action that meant that Snape read more from the approach of James than Harry did. If James' wand had been drawn and pointed surely Harry's POV would be questioning *that* behaviour, rather than Snapes. The sentence questions Snapes behaviour... ie "Why did Severus reach for his wand?" and *not* James, which would be "Why did James draw his wand?" Potioncat: > Looking at the description of > Sirius and Peter, James was up to something, we can see it, and > Severus must have had reason to expect it. Valky Now: I see that my point has been misunderstood because this is how I see it, also. So my point, again, is that this fact does not support or lead to an assumption that James wand was drawn before Severus reached for his. > Valky: > No personal intent Carol but I just don't understand why others > feel the necessity to construe the story to say that James attacked an unarmed opponent without warning, it's overkill. The words simply don't support it, and it doesn't change the fact that he behaved like an Ar*e following it. > > Potioncat: > Well, James did Expelliarmus, then Sirius did another curse. What > do you call it? I would be willing to consider Expelliarmus > defense, except that it doesn't stop there and at that point all > Severus had done was to pull his wand to defend himself. > > > Valky: Indeed, I have been misunderstood. I expected this because it is really hard to specify that I am speaking strictly about the first part of the incident. Starting at James saying "All right Snivellus and ending with the words expecting an attack. This miniscule passage has been continually construed to prove that James wand was drawn before Severus reached for his., but it doesn't support this belief, at all. The first line clearly shows Harry was looking at James and only observed him speaking, the second line questions Severus' action of reaching for his wand, that adds up to James was not armed. In the passages following this James and Sirius are obviously bullying Snape, yes bullying. Disgusting , snot-faced, self- righteous and reprehensible behaviour. Angry readers want to believe further to this that James was too weak to disarm his opponent in a fair wand draw, but he wasn't. It's just overkill on the James is a rotten tomato march, it's a step too far, and I simply pointed out that it's not even a necessary one. James and Sirius behaved badly enough in what they did do. Label away angry Snape lovers, but stick to the truth, is all I am saying. > > Valky: > > Overkill! Carol. James just simply isn't this bad, you just want > him to be, right? > > Sirius statement about James *Hating* the Dark Arts is adamant and sincere, How can you doubt that? Of all the things that Sirius has said? > > Potioncat: > Even if Sirius is correct and the reason for James' dislike of > Severus is due to Dark Arts, it doesn't excuse this incident. Valky: It's not *fair* that you reply like this potioncat. It wasn't excusing anything and that is obvious from my words. Potioncat: > I am of the opinion that there is more to learn about this and I've seen Sirius be wrong before. > > I've not certain that knowing Dark Arts is any worse than hexing > people just because you can. Valky: I have had this discussion before potioncat. Have you checked your HP time;line, lately? Why? In the time of the reign of Voldemort, when a mad "DARK ARTS" wizard is killing anyone and any innocent thing he comes across, this is the time we are referring to. How can you possibly question whether the Dark Arts are worse than childish pranks. He is killing people, potioncat. It's like asking a semite if they'd rather a brown coat in their house or a frog in their bed. Your question is ridiculous. Sorry, potioncat I am getting a bit personal there. I don't mean to bite, it's just a pretty significant point to me. Valky hoping potioncat won't hate me after this. From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Fri Nov 26 01:24:00 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2004 01:24:00 -0000 Subject: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118586 > Valky: > I have had this discussion before potioncat. Have you checked your > HP time;line, lately? > Why? In the time of the reign of Voldemort, when a mad "DARK ARTS" > wizard is killing anyone and any innocent thing he comes across, > this is the time we are referring to. How can you possibly question whether the Dark Arts are worse than childish pranks. Alla: I agree, definitely. Dark Arts and any pranks (unless we know that Dark Arts were used IN the pranks ) are incomparable, IMO. I wish we knew when Voldemort started recruiting for the first time and whether he was recruting in school at all. I would imagine that for many Dark Arts were synonime of death and destruction and I do understand why people would hate someone (not just Snape, anyone), who they thought was into Drak Arts From hickengruendler at yahoo.de Fri Nov 26 01:28:51 2004 From: hickengruendler at yahoo.de (hickengruendler) Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2004 01:28:51 -0000 Subject: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118587 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "M.Clifford" wrote: Hickengruendler: I snipped a major part of the story. Valky: > How can you possibly question whether the Dark Arts are worse than > childish pranks. > He is killing people, potioncat. Hickengruendler: Is he? Well, maybe yes, as a Death Eater, that's possible. But I'm sure he wasn't killing people as a student. If he were, and everybody would have known that, than for sure he would be in Azkaban. The problem is, that we don't know what the Dark Arts really are. Are they just the Unforgivable Curses? Or is it just delving into dangerous magic? Anyway, there's nothing to suggest that teenage Snape was killing people left and right. In fact, canon contradicts this. Snape told Dumbledore, that Sirius proved himself to be able to commit murder at the age of sixteen. If Snape did so, too, and for some inecxusable reason weren't sent to Azkaban, than surely Dumbledore would have reminded him, of that. And even if he did, than the Marauders couldn't have known about that, because they would have told Harry (at least Sirius would, for sure). We did saw him killing flies, but then, I'm sure we all have already killed a fly. And at least one of the so-called childish pranks from Sirius could very well have killed Snape. How do we know that Sirius didn't attempt murder here? Maybe Snape's suspicion was right. And it's not that Sirius ever felt sorry for this. Hickengruendler, who really thinks, that if the storyline weren't told from Harry's point of view but from a more objective one, Sirius would look as bad as Snape. A nasty, prejudiced and dangerous man (with a sad life, that makes his behaviour undertandable), who nonetheless decided to fight for the good site. It's just Harry's rose-coloured point of view, that makes look Sirius better. From Aisbelmon at hotmail.com Fri Nov 26 01:37:17 2004 From: Aisbelmon at hotmail.com (M.Clifford) Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2004 01:37:17 -0000 Subject: Harry's developing behaviour - average or unique? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118589 > Geoff: > snip. > > >Will Harry revert to being like he was before his outburst years? > No. But he will return to being more civilised. He will not return > to the unquestioning and na?ve Harry of 11 but he will be the > experienced and worldy-wise Harry of 17 or 18 growing into > adulthood. This is how it works out in the real world and I see this > as being the same for the Wizarding World. Let's stop trying to > label Harry as a freak and consider him as a normal teenager for > whom the screw has been turned a notch or so tighter than normal. > > > > Alla: > > Geoff, this was beautiful, thank you. Except being a 21+ woman, I > agree with every word of your post. I see Harry's behaviour as > absolutely normal for teenager and believe that he will outgrew his outbursts. > > I just hope that even when Harry stops being an Angry!Harry most of his time, JKR will still allow him to keep his temper and to scream SOMETIMES at people who deserve it, just because it is fun to read. Valky: I second that Alla. Thankyou for sharing such a great post Geoff, I too agree, except that I am almost 30 and also female and therefore also see it from an outsiders experience. And I, like Alla, hope Harry retains a bit of his tiger spirit, sometimes giving a flat out serving and letting his feelings show. I think its honest and gives his character something more for me. From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Fri Nov 26 01:37:18 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2004 01:37:18 -0000 Subject: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118590 Hickengruendler: Is he? Well, maybe yes, as a Death Eater, that's possible. But I'm sure he wasn't killing people as a student. If he were, and everybody would have known that, than for sure he would be in Azkaban. > Alla: > > I think Valky was talking about Voldemort, not Snape, actually. Hickengruendler, who really thinks, that if the storyline weren't told from Harry's point of view but from a more objective one, Sirius would look as bad as Snape. A nasty, prejudiced and dangerous man (with a sad life, that makes his behaviour undertandable), who nonetheless decided to fight for the good site. It's just Harry's rose-coloured point of view, that makes look Sirius better. Alla: Ummm, I am not saying that Sirius is much better than Snape ( I like him more, but it certainly has nothing to do with the story), BUT if we are saying that Snape is essentially GOOD, only because he eventually decided to fight on Dumbledore's side, shouldn't the same be true for Sirius? By the way, from the facts we have right now, it certainly took Sirius' less time of his life than Snape to figure out who the good guys are. Unless, of course you beliee in ESE! Sirius. From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Fri Nov 26 01:38:17 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2004 01:38:17 -0000 Subject: Harry's developing behaviour - average or unique? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118591 Alla wrote : " Let others scream at Harry to when he deserves it, I think though that other adults (if you mean them by "people we care about") will be VERY unlikely to scream at Harry any time soon,even when he deserves it, since they (especially Dumbledore) may have a guilty conscience as to how they treated him in OOP." Del replies : I too doubt that DD will ever scream at Harry. First because he does have a guilty conscience, but mostly because I don't see screaming as his style. But the other adults ? I don't think any of them should have a guilty conscience. And I do think that some of them might start scolding Harry if he does or says something stupid. I'm thinking of Lupin, for example. If he's not ESE, then the loss of Sirius should affect him badly, and this should reflect on his attitude towards both DD and Harry. The Aurors too, especially Moody, might start acting towards Harry in a more adult way, no matter what DD thinks. Oh, and McGonagall too : I'm pretty sure she won't take any foolishness from Harry any longer. She was already quite upset with him for not realising who Umbridge really was, and what danger she represented. I'm sure she will be sympathetic to Harry because of the loss and pain he's suffered, but I also think that at the same time she will demand a more reasonable behaviour from him. And I wasn't thinking only about the adults either. I would like to see the kids reacting more to Harry too. I wish Ron and Hermione stopped taking Harry's mood swings so passively. They too are teenagers after all, and they too almost died during the DoM fiasco. As for Ginny, we already know that she doesn't take much crap from Harry anyway. I'm not wishing for any character to start pounding on Harry. That's not what I mean. All I would like to see is some *life* in the other characters. In OoP, it often looks like Harry is the only one who's got a real life. Some other characters do have emotional outbursts (Cho cries, Neville learns to fight), but there's nothing consistent (except maybe for Luna). I do know that the books are about Harry, and also that if JKR started writing a real life about too many minor characters, the books would triple in volume. I know that. But the fact that OoP was so intensely focused on Harry's volatile emotions, and that no other character seemed to have a real life of their own, made the reading of the book quite flat for me. It's a bit like when a fanfiction author introduces a new character and concentrates only on that character. The other characters still act and speak, but somehow it feels like their only role is to make life more "interesting" for the main character. Now, I know that this IS the case in HP, and that everyone around Harry is only a supporting character. But I never felt this as strongly in the previous books, and I must admit it bothers me quite a bit in OoP. I'm not sure I'm making much sense, sorry. Del From Aisbelmon at hotmail.com Fri Nov 26 01:43:44 2004 From: Aisbelmon at hotmail.com (M.Clifford) Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2004 01:43:44 -0000 Subject: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118592 > > Valky: > > > How can you possibly question whether the Dark Arts are worse than childish pranks. > > He is killing people, potioncat. > > Hickengruendler: > > Is he? Well, maybe yes, as a Death Eater, that's possible. But I'm > sure he wasn't killing people as a student. Valky: By *He*, I am referring to Voldemort. > And at > least one of the so-called childish pranks from Sirius could very > well have killed Snape. How do we know that Sirius didn't attempt > murder here? Maybe Snape's suspicion was right. > Valky: I can't believe you'd say this? I find it totally strange. From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Fri Nov 26 01:48:53 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2004 01:48:53 -0000 Subject: Harry's developing behaviour - average or unique? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118593 > Del replies : >I'm not wishing for any character to start pounding on Harry. That's not what I mean. All I would like to see is some *life* in the other characters. In OoP, it often looks like Harry is the only one who's got a real life. Some other characters do have emotional outbursts (Cho cries, Neville learns to fight), but there's nothing consistent (except maybe for Luna). Alla: Del, that I understand perfectly and agree with. Idealistically, I would love other characters to help Harry grieve and deal with it, but definitely get more fleshed out. Since I don't think that Remus is ESE, for example, I would LOVE to know what he is thinking and I also think that he is ina good position to help Harry "master his emotions" since he obvoiously ahd been "mastering his emotions" all his life. Del: > I do know that the books are about Harry, and also that if JKR started writing a real life about too many minor characters, the books would triple in volume. I know that. But the fact that OoP was so intensely focused on Harry's volatile emotions, and that no other character seemed to have a real life of their own, made the reading of the book quite flat for me. Alla: Again, I understand it perfectly and I am very lucky, since I love Harry's character, BUT of course I am also interested in the adults, nevertheless you said it yourself - the books ARE about Harry, so I think we will be lucky, if even SOME of the other characters will be more developed. > From Aisbelmon at hotmail.com Fri Nov 26 01:53:15 2004 From: Aisbelmon at hotmail.com (M.Clifford) Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2004 01:53:15 -0000 Subject: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118594 > > Alla: > > Good question is > why didn't he cast the curse while James and Lily were arguing? Maybe he did not want to harm Lily? I doubt that he had very nice feelings towards James at the moment or EVER. :) > > > > Potioncat: > Which is sort of what I'm getting at. What was he waiting for? Was > Severus distracted by Lily? Did he consider the fight over? Did he consider it unfair? As angry as he seemed to be, I'm surprised he didn't fire off a curse or two during that time. But he didn't. Yet in a moment, James fires back at him. > Valky: Sorry to be a stick in the mud, but wasn't he struggling to reach his wand? From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Fri Nov 26 02:42:48 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2004 02:42:48 -0000 Subject: Guerilla ? (Re: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118595 Potioncat wrote: "Just to clarify, James calls out "All right, Snivelus?" Do you think Severus was wrong to go for his wand? Valky answered: "I think the sentence suggests that from the Narrators POV Severus' reaching for his wand was a surprise, an action that meant that Snape read more from the approach of James than Harry did. " Del replies : Agreed : the *narrator* wonders why Snape goes for his wand. But *James* doesn't. Whether or not he expected Snape to react that way, James is not taken by surprise. He doesn't go asking "Hey ? What are you doing ?", he doesn't wait for Snape to hex him, no, he goes straight for his wand and disarms Snape. The narrator doesn't know about what we can presume is the habitual dynamic between Snape and James, but both Snape and James do. Snape expected an attack, and James expected Snape to expect an attack, this seems clear to me. But I agree that we have no indication that James's wand was drawn. However, we are told that Snape dropped his bag before reaching for his wand. Apparently, he was carrying his bag in a way that prevented him easy access to his wand, which gave James an advantage. Moreover, James and Sirius came two against one. Even if James had played fair and let Snape hex him before retaliating, Snape still wouldn't have stood a chance, because Sirius would have hexed him back right away. And finally, we don't know what was Snape's intent. Just because someone knows bad hexes doesn't mean he will automatically use them. For all we know, maybe Snape would just have retreated to the castle with his wand covering James and Sirius. In other words : the attack was apparently inexcusable. Normally, you don't attack someone just because they are drawing their wand out. Even the Expelliarmus wouldn't be justified. James and Sirius *wanted* a fight with Snape, and they didn't wait for a real excuse to have it. Valky wrote in a previous post : "Sirius statement about James *Hating* the Dark Arts is adamant and sincere, How can you doubt that? Of all the things that Sirius has said?" Del replies : First, we have only Sirius's word on it. Technically, we must consider that Sirius might have it wrong. But I tend to believe he was right. However, that doesn't justify much anything. So Snape was into the Dark Arts ? So what ? There's a difference between hating something, and hating the people who do that thing. I hate racism, but I don't hate all racists. I hate the concept of pureblood superiority, but I don't hate the Malfoys because of that. I have a certain degree of contempt, anger and spite for them because of that, but I won't hurt them because of what they believe. If they do something illegal, I will demand that they be punished. But I won't chase them down like James and Sirius chased Snape down that day. There might have been one very good reason for James and Sirius to act that way, though, and it's your further comments that bring it on. Valky wrote : " Why? In the time of the reign of Voldemort, when a mad "DARK ARTS" wizard is killing anyone and any innocent thing he comes across, this is the time we are referring to. How can you possibly question whether the Dark Arts are worse than childish pranks. He is killing people, potioncat. It's like asking a semite if they'd rather a brown coat in their house or a frog in their bed. " Del replies : LV is killing people and he should be punished for that. But Snape wasn't killing anybody as far as we know, so at first glance I don't see why he should be punished. People are entitled to their opinions and likings. In a relatively free world like the WW, nobody has any right to punish them for those. Snape was in the Dark Arts. But we are not told that he did anything bad with them. He knew curses and hexes and he called Lily a Mudblood. Those things are respectively dangerous and bad, but they don't make Snape a criminal. He wasn't abusing anyone, either physically or verbally, at the time James and Sirius attacked him : this attack was *unjustified*. But now we get to the really important part of the puzzle. If the attack was indeed based on James's dislike of the Dark Arts and the link between LV and the Dark Arts, then it definitely wasn't a childish prank : it was political (can't think of a better word). It's on the same level as the enmity between the DA and the I Squad, and even though there's a bit of childishness in it, much of it is based on a very adult battle for political power. In other words : if James attacked Snape because he saw Snape as a junior DE, and Snape expected that attack, then the attack was not at all a childish prank, it was an act of war, one battle in an on-going guerilla between Snape and the Marauders, something rooted in motives infinitely more serious than a personal dislike. That would put the Worst Memory on a completely different level, but it's the only reason that would make James' and Sirius' actions acceptable for me. There are several problems with this theory though. First Lily doesn't seem to have noticed that dynamic, but then maybe she wouldn't, if Snape and the Marauders kept their guerilla secret enough. The second problem is that Lupin and Sirius don't mention it at all when they answer Harry's questions. They try to pass it as a childish prank. I'm not sure why they would do that. If Harry's son happened to see the treatment Harry gave to Draco at the end of OoP, I don't see why Harry wouldn't explain that it was much more than a personal dislike. The third problem is that such a guerilla should have been based on much more than personal opinions. Snape would have had to have been *doing* things to justify such drastic punishment. I'm not saying he wasn't, but JKR isn't saying that he was either. His only crimes so far seem to have been an unfortunate liking of the Dark Arts, an ugly physique, and an annoying habit of spying on the Marauders for private reasons. Nothing political in this, and nothing justifying using guerilla tactics on him. Del, still wondering what's so bad about that memory that it would be Snape's worst From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Fri Nov 26 02:51:30 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2004 02:51:30 -0000 Subject: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118596 Hickengruendler wrote : " And at least one of the so-called childish pranks from Sirius could very well have killed Snape. How do we know that Sirius didn't attempt murder here? Maybe Snape's suspicion was right. " Valky answered : " I can't believe you'd say this? I find it totally strange." Del replies : Why ? It *is* a possibility, don't you think ? After all, Snape was apparently right when he said that James wasn't the Completely Nice Guy Harry thought he was. Could he also be right when he said that Sirius tried to murder him ? Del From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Fri Nov 26 03:00:07 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2004 03:00:07 -0000 Subject: Guerilla ? (Re: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118597 > Del replies : huge snip. >In other words : if James attacked Snape because he saw Snape as a >junior DE, and Snape expected that attack, then the attack was not at all a childish prank, it was an act of war, one battle in an on- going guerilla between Snape and the Marauders, something rooted in motives infinitely more serious than a personal dislike. That would put the Worst Memory on a completely different level, but it's the only reason that would make James' and Sirius' actions acceptable for me. Alla: Well, Del thank you for expressing it so well, because that is almost similar to what I suspect the complete picture will be. Suppose though, that the picture will be similar to the one you drew, but not exactly. For example at this time, Severus did not do anythign REALLY bad with DA yet, but still James and Sirius KNEW that he was engaged in DA. James and Sirius are still jerks then, but yes they may have other motives besides personal dislike for attack. Del: > There are several problems with this theory though. First Lily doesn't seem to have noticed that dynamic, but then maybe she wouldn't, if Snape and the Marauders kept their guerilla secret enough. Alla: Lily did not seem to socialise with Marauders much till their seventh year, so I am not surprised if she would not know. Del: >The second problem is that Lupin and Sirius don't mention it at all when they answer Harry's questions. They try to pass it as a childish prank. I'm not sure why they would do that. Alla: May I humbly refer you to my post 118290, where I tried to answer this question? From snow15145 at yahoo.com Fri Nov 26 04:30:38 2004 From: snow15145 at yahoo.com (snow15145) Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2004 04:30:38 -0000 Subject: Harry's developing behaviour - average or unique? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118598 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Geoff Bannister" wrote: > > I often wonder whether it reflects the demographic structure of HPFGU > but to me it is noticeable that threads regarding Harry's > development and the question of boys' behaviour seem largely to be > posed and answered by women members of the group. As a result, I > sometimes feel that this puts a wrong spin on the matter because > looking at the matter from my perspective, I feel that wrong > conclusions are drawn as to whether Harry's behaviour is fairly > normal or unique to him. > > What is my perspective? Firstly and obviously I am a male and was a > teenager some little time ago (my current age being 21+). > Additionally, I have had a great deal of experience dealing with > young people. For over 30 years I taught in South London at the same > school. Over the years it moved from being an 11+ to 16 boys' school > to a 13+ to 18 mixed and then finally to a 12+ to 16 mixed so I was > dealing with teenagers for my entire professional career. I also have > three children, now grown up, of whom two are male and, although I > took early retirement several years ago, my wife and I still work > with teenagers in our church Boys' Club. > > So, is Harry's journey from 11 to nearly 16 unusual? Is the move > from "Too Good" Harry to CapsLock!Harry a reasonable progression? And > do we expect him to calm down and become pleasanter after this? I > would say yes and want to set out comparisons between Harry's > progress and that of a typical real world guy. > > We meet Harry as a na?ve, uncertain 11 year old in 1991. At that > time, many boys of that age would be in the same situation. Up to > that age, their thinking had been very much guided by their family; > they usually conformed to the structure of the family. Boys of that > age still see the world very much in black and white; things are good > or bad. I remember, when my school was about to change from 11+ > intake to a 13 year old intake, having a conversation with my > Headmaster, who was a very wise old bird ? definitely in the > Dumbledore mould. I said that I could see potential problems with > boys coming in at Third Year level because we usually gained the > loyalty and support of the First Years without any hassle but I could > anticipate that, being two years older, they would probably be more > streetwise and likely to question what was going on. My headmaster's > perceptive comment about the First Year boys was something > like "True. When they are at the age of 11, they haven't lost their > sense of wonderment or magic." > > In my opinion therefore, Harry was not unusual at this age. He was > quiet and reserved, not many close friends. So was I. I was a bit of > a swot; I enjoyed finding out about things and wasn't particularly > athletic. Harry also wasn't completely angelic. Although he kept his > head down, metaphorically and physically, at Privet Drive, he > obviously had his views which were sometimes a little "wicked". We > see him in PS thinking of Dudley as a pig in a wig and he allowed > himself to visualise Dudley resembling one of the gorillas at the > Zoo. When he is annoyed or stressed, his wandless reflex magic > surfaces from time to time. In COS, he has great fun frightening > Dudley with his wand and he certainly produces a couple of sarcastic > replies for Aunt Marge in POA. So there is certainly a spark present > waiting to be triggered off! > > What about him in OOTP? I said earlier that at 11, things are black > and white. It is as we approach our teens that the grey areas begin > to creep in. People we have looked up to as marvellous ? maybe even > parents or grandparents ? suddenly have occasions when they let us > down, embarrass us and try to continue directing our lives as they > did when we were younger. Teens want room to flex their muscles ? > physically, behaviourally and socially ? and like to spend time > pushing at the barriers and seeing if they can be prised open a > little further. And with it can come the tempers and the outbursts. I > know about that ? I had red hair (then!). Both my sons went through > spells like this in their mid-teens. My elder son was dreadful; we > didn't dare take him anywhere. He was angry, moody, sullen and anti- > social. Today, he is happily married and working towards a doctorate > in Theology as a mature student. My younger son lived on a short > fuse for years (as did our nerves). Something would displease him and > there would be a minor volcanic eruption. He would address us in > capital letters and then stomp off to his room; you could tell by the > diminishing sounds of doors being slammed hard where he was. He is > now a highly-paid computer consultant used to making measured > decisions for companies. OK, so Harry had extra reasons for blowing > his top over and above the usual pressures of adolescence but much of > what he does and thinks are in part the normal behaviour and > development of average teenage males. > > Will Harry revert to being like he was before his outburst years? No. > But he will return to being more civilised. He will not return to the > unquestioning and na?ve Harry of 11 but he will be the experienced > and worldy-wise Harry of 17 or 18 growing into adulthood. This is how > it works out in the real world and I see this as being the same for > the Wizarding World. Let's stop trying to label Harry as a freak and > consider him as a normal teenager for whom the screw has been turned > a notch or so tighter than normal. > > Geoff > http://www.aspectsofexmoor.com Snow: Your post, Geoff, was extraordinary! I appreciate a man's point of view and can agree except where it involves Harry's acute actions to his feelings in OOP. I agree that it could be a typical teenage angst but this boy has voices in his head that isn't normal in any spectrum. These voices haven't been exactly pinned down as to whom they are but we do know that a piece of Voldemort is inside of Harry. In this case we are not dealing with a real world conception of the typical teenager, male or female. There is nothing typical about Harry or his background let alone his future. It can be typical for any teenager (even those you think would never ) to behave in an unusual fashion but Harry is different despite Dumbledore's protective blockers to keep him as normal a boy as he could hope for. Harry is just not the A typical teenager, and I don't think we should perceive him as such. Even Dumbledore does not underestimate Harry's behavior as his own when he refuses to look at Harry, for the majority of the year, because of the intense presence of Voldemort that lies within. Snow From nrenka at yahoo.com Fri Nov 26 04:38:31 2004 From: nrenka at yahoo.com (nrenka) Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2004 04:38:31 -0000 Subject: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118599 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "hickengruendler" wrote: > Hickengruendler: > > Is he? Well, maybe yes, as a Death Eater, that's possible. But I'm > sure he wasn't killing people as a student. If he were, and > everybody would have known that, than for sure he would be in > Azkaban. The problem is, that we don't know what the Dark Arts > really are. Are they just the Unforgivable Curses? Or is it just > delving into dangerous magic? Anyway, there's nothing to suggest > that teenage Snape was killing people left and right. In fact, > canon contradicts this. Snape told Dumbledore, that Sirius proved > himself to be able to commit murder at the age of sixteen. If > Snape did so, too, and for some inecxusable reason weren't sent to > Azkaban, than surely Dumbledore would have reminded him, of that. I don't think Teenage!Snape was killing people, but I'm going to be very surprised if we don't end up with a picture of Teenage!Snape pretty well on the path to becoming a DE by messing with Dark Stuff. (As a side note, I think the Dark Arts are *objectively* Dark in JKR's world, even though I can't prove that and would like some more info on them, and they are Bad Mojo indeed. From what we've seen of them, they reflect the ethic of force at its very worst.) One might ask some questions about the infamous and enigmatic line, in response to Snape's allegations against Black: "My memory is as good as it ever was, Severus". No one knows what that means. It could well be a reminder of "I know what you did", or "I know what really happened". Not a clue. There's also the various snippets of info on what DE!Snape got up to. From the Edinburgh Festival, the lovely "But you must not forget that Snape was a Death Eater. He will have seen things that " (Don't forget the continuation, where she says "Why do people love Snape? I do not understand this.") :) There's also the interview commentary from I forget where, where she tells us that Dumbledore won't let Snape teach DADA because it would "bring out the worst in him", and we have the in-book echoes of that, too. Just think about it. Dumbledore hired Lockhart over Snape, rather than let the latter teach DADA. I'm aware that none of this impinges directly on Teenage!Snape, but given what he turned into and the fairly short amount of time involved (although I again note our time scale is a big hypothetic), I don't think it's too far to extrapolate that Teenage!Snape was potentially something of a nasty piece of work, with his knowledge and interests. Should she prove this wrong, I'll be very interested to see how it goes. Joining the DEs seems to have been an ideologically aware act, even if it wasn't one fully aware of everything that was demanded. Some may not wish to judge a character so harshly for joining the band of fascists. I hope JKR gives us a good picture of what the DEs were really doing back then--it might bring it up from something of the abstract state that it currently inhabits. -Nora notes that her kitchen is clean and spotless, baby From azriona at juno.com Fri Nov 26 08:52:43 2004 From: azriona at juno.com (Sharon) Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2004 08:52:43 -0000 Subject: Spy novel? maybe (was Lupin's secrets ) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118600 Naama: > First, my argument is about the *general* trustworthiness of people > in the Potterverse. Azriona: And generally, I would have to say that my theory still stands. Trust, but verfy. >Naama: > Secondly: > 1. We, and Harry, never "saw" Sirius or Peter. We hear of them, we > see Sirius' picture - that's all. Az: I think you're taking me too literally here. I'm not refering to an actual face-to-face meeting here. I'm talking about our first impressions of Sirius or Peter - which, for both Harry and the reader, were very much the opposite of what we learned later. >Naama: Neither of them gained Harry's > trust and then betrayed that trust... Az: You're right, they didn't. Which leaves me to consider: Harry got the bulk of his information about Sirius and Peter from the conversation in Hogsmeade, in which McGonagall, Fudge and Hagrid told Rosmerta about the entire SK thing. Does this mean, since the three of them (unwittingly) gave Harry erroneous information, that he should no longer trust them? Or that he should simply no longer trust information he can't personally verify? (Trust but verify *again*.) Another point to consider: Harry has heard first that Sirius Black was a traitor. And then that traitor gives him another story. Immediately, Harry goes for the second story, and trusts Sirius fully. Seems a bit rash, doesn't it, particularly given that Remus Lupin isn't exactly an unbiased opinion in the matter. Perhaps verification in the form of Peter Pettigrew was enough for Harry - but Harry doesn't even pause to hear Peter's side of the story. Trust that Peter is suddenly in the wrong, no verification. >Naama: > 2. Fudge was signed (not least, by his name) from the very beginning > as a moral coward - not evil, but reluctant to face unpleasant > realities. The first time we see him, if you remember, he is caving > under public pressure - he is sending Hagrid to Azkaban for the sole > purpose of being as doing something (the classical scapegoating > manoeuver). Az: I'll give you Fudge. But we heard about him in PS/SS previously, if not by name, but by the fact that he was owling DD often for advice. >Naama: > 3. I still see DD as kindly and as having Harry's best interests at > heart. The end of OotP, in fact, should show us how very much at > heart he had Harry - to the point of risking the final defeat of > Voldemort. Az: "Here, kid, you're fifteen and it's either you or Voldy, and I haven't told you squat about what that scar really means, or your connection with Voldy, plus it's not like I've even looked you square in the eye recently or explained why, and I know you're not at your most powerful, and you've just suffered a blow because your godfather kicked the bucket a minute or two ago, but here, go fight the most evil wizard of our time, and no pressure, but please win." If this is Harry's best interests at heart, thank ye gods that DD likes the boy, otherwise I'd be afraid of what might happen next. > Naama: I didn't say that > we always know everything about a character right away - that would > make the story boring; but, *by and large*, added information does > not contradict previous information. By and large, no. But for the movers and the shakers of the plot - which include Sirius, Peter, Voldy, Percy, et al, extra information *does* either contradict or put a different spin on previous knowledge. > Naama: 5. Actually, the Moody example strengthens my argument. Moody (the > real Moody) is exactly the kind of person the readers are led to > believe he is - loyal to the cause and to DD. The twist is that > somebody else impersonated him. To me, this shows how reluctant JKR > is to subvert readers' established views on characters. Sure, Barty Crouch did a great job impersonating Moody. That doesn't mean that JKR didn't deliberately trick us or use him to point out that we can't always take things at face value. Do I trust that the real Moody is who everyone says he is? To a point, sure. But do I trust that the next person to pop up won't be Polyjuiced into someone else? Heck no. When DD says, "This is my brother Aberforth and his pet goat Janice," you can bet I've got a very close eye on Janice. > Naama: 6. Yes. Both Harry and the reader are mistaken about Riddle. This is > one case - maybe the only one - where we are truly deceived. So. If we aren't deceived about Sirius Black, does that mean you think he's a DE? If we aren't deceived about Peter Pettigrew, does that mean you think he was framed? If we aren't deceived about Percy, do you think he's under Imperio? Heaven save us from a plot in which the characters behave in predictable patterns...in which we never receive contradictory information...in which without the element of mystery and surprise we no longer want to turn the page. The book which has no deception, twist, and wrongly placed loyalty in it will never be so widely loved. --azriona From paul_terzis at yahoo.gr Fri Nov 26 09:18:15 2004 From: paul_terzis at yahoo.gr (paul_terzis) Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2004 09:18:15 -0000 Subject: Harry's developing behaviour - average or unique? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118601 > Snow wrote: > Your post, Geoff, was extraordinary! I appreciate a man's point of > view and can agree except where it involves Harry's acute actions to > his feelings in OOP. I agree that it could be a typical teenage angst > but this boy has voices in his head that isn't normal in any > spectrum. These voices haven't been exactly pinned down as to whom > they are but we do know that a piece of Voldemort is inside of Harry. > In this case we are not dealing with a real world conception of the > typical teenager, male or female. There is nothing typical about > Harry or his background let alone his future. > It can be typical for any teenager (even those you think would > never ) to behave in an unusual fashion but Harry is different > despite Dumbledore's protective blockers to keep him as normal a boy > as he could hope for. Harry is just not the A typical teenager, and > I don't think we should perceive him as such. > Even Dumbledore does not underestimate Harry's behavior as his own > when he refuses to look at Harry, for the majority of the year, > because of the intense presence of Voldemort that lies within. > I agree with Snow. Harry is not exactly the average teenager. In addition to the typical teenage angst, he has some aggravating factors. He had been abused emotionally ang mentally enough for a lifetime by his "caring family". He faced more than once near-death situations. There is a maniac, powerful, evil wizard who with his gang who consists of sadists murderers seeks to kill Harry and everyone near Harry in every possible opportunity. He had already lost his parents and his godfather by this maniac. Well to be honest I am really surprised that Harry is acting so mildly until now. I was expected more violent outbursts from him in OOTP. Maybe JKR tries to outline Harry's story as parralel for the dilemmas and opposite for the choices to that of Voldermort. Of course that remains to be seen in book 6 and book 7. Cheers, Paul From hickengruendler at yahoo.de Fri Nov 26 09:37:58 2004 From: hickengruendler at yahoo.de (hickengruendler) Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2004 09:37:58 -0000 Subject: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118602 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "M.Clifford" wrote: > Valky: > By *He*, I am referring to Voldemort. Hickengruendler: Yes, sorry. Now I've realized it, too. I really shouldn't have answered this post on 2.am, than maybe I would have gotten the facts straight. Sorry. However: > > And at > > least one of the so-called childish pranks from Sirius could very > > well have killed Snape. How do we know that Sirius didn't attempt > > murder here? Maybe Snape's suspicion was right. > > > > Valky: > I can't believe you'd say this? I find it totally strange. Hickengruendler: Why do you think so? I wouldn't completely put it past Sirius (neither would I put it past Snape). I just think, that both, Sirius and Snape, when angry, are much more dangerous than many fans think. To be honest, I think it's more likely, that Sirius didn't realize the full consequences of the prank (not that I think it excuses it), but I still find the attempted murder part not impossible. Not in cold-blooded and planned manner, but if Sirius did know what could happen (and at least theoretically he did), and still sent Snape to the Whoomping Willow, than I have to come to the conclusion that he obviously wouldn't have cared at all if Lupin had eaten Snape (and I won't even start about what that would have meant for Lupin). At the very least I can understand that Snape never forgave him, I also wouldn't that easily forgive someone who tried to feed me to the beasts. Hickengruendler, who likes Sirius as a character, but thinks that as a human being, he is as flawed as Snape From finwitch at yahoo.com Fri Nov 26 09:45:27 2004 From: finwitch at yahoo.com (finwitch) Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2004 09:45:27 -0000 Subject: Harry's developing behaviour - average or unique? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118603 Paul: -- Well to be honest I am > really surprised that Harry is acting so mildly until now. I was > expected more violent outbursts from him in OOTP. Maybe JKR tries to > outline Harry's story as parralel for the dilemmas and opposite for > the choices to that of Voldermort. Of course that remains to be seen > in book 6 and book 7. Finwitch: Quite right - things being as they are, Harry HAS been keeping his temper in check beyond my expectations (and McGonagall punishes him for NOT doing so???) I was expecting Harry's anger to cause something explode - (it DID happen when Marjorie Dursley insulted Lily and James) - but - a bit surprisingly, SNAPE was the one losing his temper to that extent. Not that I ever saw that character as a true adult in that respect... We'll see, but I wouldn't be surprised if Harry lost his temper big time - causing a car accident or a house explosion or his family-members becoming balloons... (and the wizards of Accidental Magic Reversal Squad trying to calm him down end up ballooning, too...) Finwitch From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com Fri Nov 26 10:53:01 2004 From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (arrowsmithbt) Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2004 10:53:01 -0000 Subject: Spy novel? maybe (was Lupin's secrets ) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118604 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "delwynmarch" wrote: > > In short : it's not just the personality, it's also the opportunity. > And we simply don't know what opportunities all the HP characters have > been offered or will be offered. > > Added to the fact that we don't even know much about the deep > personality of many of them, I think it's not such a huge leap to > make, to say that we can't really trust any of them. > You'll not be surprised at my agreement. What both Harry and we lack is information. And the frustrating thing is that we strongly suspect that the relevant info is not tied up in some macguffin (although some suspect that prophecy globes may make a re-appearance) but in the minds of some of the characters themselves. They know, they just ain't saying. To the reader - well, it's an incentive to keep reading. I for one can't wait to get elbow deep in the motivations of some of these guys. The motivations matter, I think. Jo hints as much by saying that almost nobody is born evil. The opportunity to become evil is one thing, it's an opportunity open to everyone, but if they're not born evil, how do they become evil? What drives them to it? What is their motivation? Power say some. Fine; probably is in some instances, but it's not unknown for people to choose sides not through general principles, but because of where friends or personal enemies stand. But another question occurs - are things being kept from Harry (and therefore us) because of plot requirements - in other words because it's *essential* that Harry not have the information before the denoument - or has JKR set it up this way just to keep the readers guessing? I hope it's the former. It would certainly explain the apparent ambiguities. Kneasy From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com Fri Nov 26 11:48:33 2004 From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (Barry Arrowsmith) Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2004 11:48:33 +0000 Subject: When? Message-ID: <19C1D20F-3FA1-11D9-8F13-000A9577CB94@btconnect.com> No: HPFGUIDX 118605 A question I've asked before - not only that, it's a question that was asked long before I joined the site - that hasn't received a convincing answer. Maybe some of the newer members can come up with an idea or two. GoF chap 34 (in the graveyard): ...said Voldemort softly. "Answer me! Imperio!" And Harry felt *for the third time in his life*, the sensation... (my emphases). Third time? Does not compute. Crouch!Moody put Harry through his paces "four times in a row" and Voldy makes five. If you take occasions rather than the number of spells, then I can only count two (the Unforgivables lesson, the graveyard). Alternatives: 1. It's a "flint", 2. Sometime either during the four books up to the end of GoF or even sometime before PS/SS starts, Harry has been Imperioed without it being obvious ( or mentioned) to us. Suggestions sought. Kneasy From Aisbelmon at hotmail.com Fri Nov 26 12:33:52 2004 From: Aisbelmon at hotmail.com (M.Clifford) Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2004 12:33:52 -0000 Subject: Guerilla ? (Re: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118606 > Del (Re: James/Sirius!anti-Junior-DE-Guerilla Theory): > > There are several problems with this theory though. > > >The second problem is that Lupin and Sirius don't mention it at all when they answer Harry's questions. They try to pass it as a > childish prank. I'm not sure why they would do that. > > > Alla: > > May I humbly refer you to my post 118290, where I tried to answer > this question? Valky: Oh, Alla my sides are splitting!!! That is the perfect explanation. From Aisbelmon at hotmail.com Fri Nov 26 12:55:34 2004 From: Aisbelmon at hotmail.com (M.Clifford) Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2004 12:55:34 -0000 Subject: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118607 Hickengruendler: > > And at least one of the so-called childish pranks from Sirius could very well have killed Snape. How do we know that Sirius didn't attempt murder here? Maybe Snape's suspicion was right. > > > > > > > Valky: > > I can't believe you'd say this? I find it totally strange. > > Hickengruendler: > > Why do you think so? I wouldn't completely put it past Sirius > (neither would I put it past Snape). I just think, that both, Sirius and Snape, when angry, are much more dangerous than many fans think. > Valky: Ahh yes, now it is all coming together, my 2am posts are infinitely worse, by the way, no foul. ;D Yes, Sirius is dangerous when angry and I am understanding you now when you say that you: " have to come to the conclusion that he obviously wouldn't have cared at all if Lupin had eaten Snape (and I won't even start about what that would have meant for Lupin). " Sirius is the atypical too hot to handle badboy. I would like to defend he all round goodness but its not really defensible, I see the best thing about Sirius as being that he respected so much his friend James, who was a better person than himself, I guess in inside that Sirius wanted to do right. But he was flawed pretty deeply. He is a case much like Snape, that requires some serious sympathising to understand. From Aisbelmon at hotmail.com Fri Nov 26 13:04:48 2004 From: Aisbelmon at hotmail.com (M.Clifford) Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2004 13:04:48 -0000 Subject: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118608 > Hickengruendler wrote : > " And at least one of the so-called childish pranks from Sirius could very well have killed Snape. How do we know that Sirius didn't attempt murder here? Maybe Snape's suspicion was right. " > > Valky answered : > " I can't believe you'd say this? I find it totally strange." > > Del replies : > Why ? It *is* a possibility, don't you think ? After all, Snape was > apparently right when he said that James wasn't the Completely Nice > Guy Harry thought he was. Could he also be right when he said that > Sirius tried to murder him ? > ] Valky: I find totally strange that Sirius after all we know of him could come across as a calculating murderer. That to me is no possibility. If there is anything I think we know about Sirius now it is his heart, and his heart is lonely, vulnerable and bitter, but not cold. In the context of a bitter rampage without thought to consequence I can see Snape could have a point, but his statement is intended as point to a cold feelingless evil Sirius, so I am sure he is not right about that. From Aisbelmon at hotmail.com Fri Nov 26 13:39:59 2004 From: Aisbelmon at hotmail.com (M.Clifford) Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2004 13:39:59 -0000 Subject: Guerilla ? (Re: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118609 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "delwynmarch" wrote: > And finally, we don't know what was Snape's intent. Just because > someone knows bad hexes doesn't mean he will automatically use them. For all we know, maybe Snape would just have retreated to the castle with his wand covering James and Sirius. > Valky: Really good point Del, although I think a shadow is cast upon it by the canon from Lupin that Snape never missed an opportunity to curse James. Perhaps in this case it might have been different, that is certainly a possibility. > > Valky wrote : > " Why? In the time of the reign of Voldemort, when a mad "DARK ARTS" wizard is killing anyone and any innocent thing he comes across, this is the time we are referring to. > How can you possibly question whether the Dark Arts are worse than > childish pranks. > He is killing people, potioncat. It's like asking a semite if they'd rather a brown coat in their house or a frog in their bed. " > > Del replies : > LV is killing people and he should be punished for that. But Snape > wasn't killing anybody as far as we know, so at first glance I don't see why he should be punished. > Valky: I agree with your point, you might like to note that the question I was replying to is Is Dark Arts worse than hexing people just because you can. In the context of the story, it is the Dark Arts that is killing their loved ones and James hexes do not much but give him a bad name. Most importantly *death and destruction* does not wear off, bat-bogey does. THis, I think, is the difference intrinsically implied by the separation of Dark Arts from common Hexes. Hence my inference that a childish prank cannot be worse than Voldemorts reign of terror. I am not making sense am I. Del: > People are entitled to their opinions and likings. In a relatively > free world like the WW, nobody has any right to punish them for those. Snape was in the Dark Arts. But we are not told that he did anything bad with them. He knew curses and hexes and he called Lily a Mudblood. Those things are respectively dangerous and bad, but they don't make Snape a criminal. He wasn't abusing anyone, either physically or verbally, at the time James and Sirius attacked him : this attack was *unjustified*. > Valky: I don't reach for justification of the attack, though. Just a better understanding of James. I recall not long ago, Del that you made here an excellent case for the Hero/Saving people thing over compassion in Harry. I was compelled by your argument to alter my opinion. I know see quite well that Harry *has* the saving people thing, to a large extent over compassion for others suffering and I have lifted the blueprint you gave me and laid it over James profile. It's a perfect match. You might call it Guerilla war tactics but I see a classic case of hero complex, in the framework that you laid out. ie saving people that didnt ask to be saved, marching in to overpower a percieved threat without actually considering the whole picture... sounds like the "Guerilla theory" of the worst meory to me. Del: > But now we get to the really important part of the puzzle. If the > attack was indeed based on James's dislike of the Dark Arts and the > link between LV and the Dark Arts, then it definitely wasn't a > childish prank : it was political (can't think of a better word). It's on the same level as the enmity between the DA and the I Squad, and even though there's a bit of childishness in it, much of it is based on a very adult battle for political power. > Valky: Oh yes, I wholeheartedly agree. As I see it James and Sirius both held themselves quite as the *adults* of the situation. I think the biggest culprit of this self righteous sense of superior maturity was Sirius. He had a serious agenda from a young age, where I believe James main ambition was to steal the glory from the Dark Side, poke fun at *it's* proclamation of absolute power. James didn't see Snape, he saw the Dark Arts and nothing more, and he thought he could save the world by lightening their hearts against it. Snape was *convenient* as long as he carried the "I believe in the Dark Side" banner in James mind, he didn't really exist only the banner did and it was James anti-flag. So he burned it. I guess that explains how I see it, a bit. > Del, still wondering what's so bad about that memory that it would be Snape's worst Valky: I really think it has to do with Lily. Perhaps not with Snapes feelings about her, but how heavily her words that day have weighed on his heart since. The day she almost saved him perhaps. Lily Lily.... we really should dissect her part in it like we have everyone else's. From Aisbelmon at hotmail.com Fri Nov 26 13:44:41 2004 From: Aisbelmon at hotmail.com (M.Clifford) Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2004 13:44:41 -0000 Subject: When? In-Reply-To: <19C1D20F-3FA1-11D9-8F13-000A9577CB94@btconnect.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118610 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Barry Arrowsmith wrote: > A question I've asked before - not only that, it's a question > that was asked long before I joined the site - that hasn't > received a convincing answer. Maybe some of the newer > members can come up with an idea or two. > > GoF chap 34 (in the graveyard): > > ...said Voldemort softly. "Answer me! Imperio!" > And Harry felt *for the third time in his life*, the sensation... > (my emphases). > > Third time? > Does not compute. > > Crouch!Moody put Harry through his paces "four times in a row" and > Voldy makes five. > > If you take occasions rather than the number of spells, then I can > only count two (the Unforgivables lesson, the graveyard). > > Alternatives: > 1. It's a "flint", > 2. Sometime either during the four books up to the end of GoF or even > sometime before PS/SS starts, Harry has been Imperioed without it being > obvious ( or mentioned) to us. > > Suggestions sought. > > Kneasy Valky: The best suggestion I have heard regarding this is that the third time is during the Quidditch world cup when the Veela entrance the men and boys in the crowd. Perhaps we are given an opportunity to draw the parrallel and recall the Veela in thinking about the unforgivables, and hence probably the War. I can't remember, are they generally considered to be on the side of light or Dark. From miamibarb at BellSouth.net Fri Nov 26 13:42:44 2004 From: miamibarb at BellSouth.net (Barb Roberts) Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2004 08:42:44 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] When? In-Reply-To: <19C1D20F-3FA1-11D9-8F13-000A9577CB94@btconnect.com> References: <19C1D20F-3FA1-11D9-8F13-000A9577CB94@btconnect.com> Message-ID: <0D2C5D25-3FB1-11D9-BD1F-000A95DC8A32@bellsouth.net> No: HPFGUIDX 118611 Kneasy wrote: > A question I've asked before... > GoF chap? 34 (in the graveyard): > ...said Voldemort softly. "Answer me! Imperio!" And Harry felt *for > the third time in his life*, the sensation... > > Third time? Does not compute. > > Crouch!Moody put Harry through his paces "four times in a row" and > Voldy makes five. If you? take occasions rather than the number of > spells, then I can only? count two (the Unforgivables lesson, the > graveyard). > > Alternatives: > 1. It's a "flint" > > 2. Sometime...Harry has been Imperioed without it being obvious (or > mentioned) to us. In addition to your alternatives, it's possible that all the "extra paces" merged into one memory sensation, but somehow separate from the very first Imperio during class. Sometimes memories run together in such a fashion, both to the person involved (and...ahem... to the author writing abut the memories. ) It's also possible, that Crouch! Moody had a follow-up lesson on another occasion. Now I suspect there were occasions that Aunt Petunia would only have been too happy to have had magical powers, only so that she could Imperio Harry into behaving like a proper muggle. But if she had had such powers, Harry would have been Imperioed thousands of times at the very least. (`'?.?(`'?.?-:?:-?.?' ?)?.?'?) -:?:-??..-:?:-* ~ Barbara~ *-:?:-..??-:?:- (?.?'?(?.?'?-:?:-`'?.?)`'?.?) [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From mgrantwich at yahoo.com Fri Nov 26 13:54:34 2004 From: mgrantwich at yahoo.com (Magda Grantwich) Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2004 05:54:34 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041126135435.71674.qmail@web53109.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 118612 > Alla: > > > By the way, from the facts we have right now, it certainly took > Sirius' less time of his life than Snape to figure out who the good > guys are. Unless, of course you beliee in ESE! Sirius. Yes, and that should give us some pause before we go condemning Teen!Snape as some kind of Dark Arts nerd with no redeeming qualities. Sirius Black, from a Dark Arts family, was befriended by someone who held out a different view of what being a good wizard was all about. Perhaps instead of hexing Snape they'd taken the time to befriend him, he too could have been shown an alternate path. It's worth remembering that the Dark Arts aren't illegal. Voldemort and the DE's would not face a trial for using the Dark Arts, they'd be tried for murder, assault, mind control, use of the Unforgiveables. I really can't quite understand the logic of hexing Snape just because he's (supposedly) interested in the DA: James: There's Snape! Let's hex him to show that we hate the DA! Sirius: Right! Then he'll see he should be good like us! Magda __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? The all-new My Yahoo! - What will yours do? http://my.yahoo.com From mgrantwich at yahoo.com Fri Nov 26 13:59:37 2004 From: mgrantwich at yahoo.com (Magda Grantwich) Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2004 05:59:37 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Harry's developing behaviour - average or unique? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041126135937.78490.qmail@web53105.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 118613 > Now, I know that this IS the case in HP, and that everyone around > Harry is only a supporting character. But I never felt this as > strongly in the previous books, and I must admit it bothers me > quite a bit in OoP. > > I'm not sure I'm making much sense, sorry. > > Del I think it makes sense. One of the things that bugged me about the end of the book was when Harry was in the hospital wing with Hermione and Ron recovering. Not once does it cross his mind that these are his best friends, that they're in the hospital because they followed him even though they had qualms and that he feels even slightly humbled about this loyalty and determined to do better at deserving it. Yeah, yeah, I know he was numb with grief over Sirius yadda yadda but that's even more reason to reflect on the friends you've got left. Magda __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Meet the all-new My Yahoo! - Try it today! http://my.yahoo.com From mgrantwich at yahoo.com Fri Nov 26 14:10:28 2004 From: mgrantwich at yahoo.com (Magda Grantwich) Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2004 06:10:28 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041126141029.75874.qmail@web53106.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 118614 > There's also the various snippets of info on what DE!Snape got up > to. From the Edinburgh Festival, the lovely "But you must not > forget that Snape was a Death Eater. He will have seen things > that" (Don't forget the continuation, where she says "Why do > people love Snape? I do not understand this.") :) > > -Nora notes that her kitchen is clean and spotless, baby Interesting that she says "he will have SEEN things that..." not "he will have DONE things that..." Assistant-to-Voldemort's-Potion-Master!Snape sounds quite likely. We like Snape because he's multi-dimensional. She should be proud of that. Also there was a considerable pause before she went into her continuation. She was doing what she always does when she doesn't want to give away anything: she was talking out the question, giving advice to Rickman!fans about "bad boys". Magda __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Take Yahoo! Mail with you! Get it on your mobile phone. http://mobile.yahoo.com/maildemo From caseylane at wideopenwest.com Fri Nov 26 15:07:34 2004 From: caseylane at wideopenwest.com (Casey) Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2004 15:07:34 -0000 Subject: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs In-Reply-To: <20041126135435.71674.qmail@web53109.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118615 > It's worth remembering that the Dark Arts aren't illegal. Voldemort > and the DE's would not face a trial for using the Dark Arts, they'd > be tried for murder, assault, mind control, use of the > Unforgiveables. I really can't quite understand the logic of hexing > Snape just because he's (supposedly) interested in the DA: ! Then he'll see he should be good like us! > > Magda Correct me if I'm wrong but are the Dark Arts actually illegal now? (I'm at work, sorry.) I know they aren't "acceptable" but are they outlawed? I remember Draco saying that his mother wanted him to go to Durmstrang, and that the Dark Arts were still taught there. When I look at Snape during his school years, I think of an unattractive, goth kid with limited social skills, being picked on by the High School jocks. I guess that's why I give him the benefit of the doubt and dislike Sirius so much. That and the fact that I can't get past the Shack incident. It was attempted murder in my book and we send boys his age to prison for doing similar things things today. Instead of trying to feed people to werewolves they bring guns to school to get even with those they don't like. Casey From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com Fri Nov 26 15:50:34 2004 From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (arrowsmithbt) Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2004 15:50:34 -0000 Subject: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs In-Reply-To: <20041126135435.71674.qmail@web53109.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118616 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Magda Grantwich wrote: > > Yes, and that should give us some pause before we go condemning > Teen!Snape as some kind of Dark Arts nerd with no redeeming > qualities. > > Sirius Black, from a Dark Arts family, was befriended by someone who > held out a different view of what being a good wizard was all about. > Perhaps instead of hexing Snape they'd taken the time to befriend > him, he too could have been shown an alternate path. > > It's worth remembering that the Dark Arts aren't illegal. Voldemort > and the DE's would not face a trial for using the Dark Arts, they'd > be tried for murder, assault, mind control, use of the > Unforgiveables. I really can't quite understand the logic of hexing > Snape just because he's (supposedly) interested in the DA: > > James: There's Snape! Let's hex him to show that we hate the DA! > Sirius: Right! Then he'll see he should be good like us! > Not only is Dark Magic/Dark Arts apparently not illegal, nobody has satisfactorily defined just what constitutes them. Most accept/assume that intention has something to do with it, but there must be some other defining characteristic. Let's face it, just about any spell can be cast with evil intent, but according to young Malfoy in GoF, at Durmstrang they actually learn Dark Arts. They're different. I also wonder just how much Snapey knew aged 11; I'd be surprised if Sirius didn't know almost as much. We know that the Black family was pretty nasty, we assume the Snape family was too. Add the fact that wizard kids seem to get their wands just before entering Hogwarts and they could both have picked up a fair amount of theory but probably not much practice. It all seems a bit vague; James hates Dark Arts yet wanders around hexing students that annoy him. Sevvy is supposedly the Dark Arts expert yet there are no examples given of him using them. Sure he causes a cut on James's face, but what spell or type of spell it was we're not told. For all we know it might be equivalent to Heidleberg duelling stroke. Unfortunately, in the only formal duelling set up we've seen it was supposed to be disarming spells only, though others were used - by second years with limited skills. Makes you wonder what else they use when it gets a bit more serious. Maybe Flitwick will show us his skills sometime. Kneasy From nrenka at yahoo.com Fri Nov 26 15:56:30 2004 From: nrenka at yahoo.com (nrenka) Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2004 15:56:30 -0000 Subject: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs In-Reply-To: <20041126141029.75874.qmail@web53106.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118617 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Magda Grantwich wrote: Magda: > Interesting that she says "he will have SEEN things that..." > not "he will have DONE things that..." > Assistant-to-Voldemort's-Potion-Master!Snape sounds quite likely. True. But that means *minimum* of aiding-and-abetting. It also makes it likely that he actually got to go along for the ride, unless you want to restrict his participation to standing around and smirking while people are killed in front of Voldie back in the Evil Overlord Lair. I find it hard to reconcile a Snape who didn't actually have to do anything but make potions with the example (admittedly spotty) of Regulus Black, who panicked at the demands and got killed. I still think there's nothing to suggest that Snape got exempted from the generic dirty work of the DEs. He was probably a talented kid, but I still don't quite see 19-year-old Snape as the type strong and powerful enough to get exemptions for his talents. Voldemort also seems to *like* reminding his minions that they all have to do the grunt work, hence Lucius Malfoy on the MoM raid. [Should I be wrong, I bow gracefully to filled-in information.] To dovetail in another response: I think the Dark Arts probably *are* illegal. Question is: were they then, or is it that they are now? Not sure. But you can get your house raided for artifacts, and the sellers thereof reside in the shady part of town. That's not even to get into the question of moral and ethical rot involved with them. Our evidence so far suggests that Snape was enough into them that Dumbledore worried about what they were/had/would do to Snape. Perhaps because I tend to take them seriously, I can envision an (idiotically going about it, in part because of deep fears) Vigilante!James, in school. The Dark Arts seem to be what divides pureblood families like the Potters, who don't seem to have the blood ideas held up high, from families like the Malfoys and Blacks, who do. Given our scanty evidence, there's still a fairly strong association between the Dark Arts, pureblood ideology, and becoming a DE. I can see James' behavior towards a young Severus he suspects of being into the Dark Arts as a boneheaded vigilante response, because I think those currents were probably strong back then, the conflicts between those who were supporters of ideology Voldemort promulgated and those who weren't--the time just before everything really exploded into the open. Unless it was already exploding and we just don't quite know about that either. Mind you, that's no excuse for such nasty behavior on James' part. But fear does unpleasant things to human beings, and I think there is fear involved: "Those people into the Dark Arts, look what they're doing/going to do to the rest of us--teach them a lesson now!". "Fear is the matrix of vice", says one of my favorite authors. It's worth thinking about it as a motivation. > We like Snape because he's multi-dimensional. She should be proud > of that. Also there was a considerable pause before she went into > her continuation. She was doing what she always does when she > doesn't want to give away anything: she was talking out the > question, giving advice to Rickman!fans about "bad boys". True; but I don't see any reason not to take at least somewhat seriously her history of comments about Snape. He may well turn out to be heroic, but I don't think we're going to get the massive character inversion that some (NOT all) fans are looking for. "I love writing (though would not necessarily want to meet) Snape", after all. I think she understands the appreciation of the character, but probably not the all-out love, as she knows him better than we do. His complexity is massively overestimated because of lack of information, anyways. Harry is honestly an objectively more complicated character than Snape, just from the sheer amount of page time and information and being inside his though processes. It's his Bildungsroman. :) -Nora rambles; if only writing papers were this easy... From fkilc at yahoo.com Fri Nov 26 12:10:31 2004 From: fkilc at yahoo.com (fkilc) Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2004 12:10:31 -0000 Subject: When? In-Reply-To: <19C1D20F-3FA1-11D9-8F13-000A9577CB94@btconnect.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118618 Barry Arrowsmith wrote: > GoF chap 34 (in the graveyard): > ...said Voldemort softly. "Answer me! Imperio!" > And Harry felt *for the third time in his life*, the sensation... > (my emphases). > Third time? I had the same thought while reading GOF. I came to the conclusion that the "first" time was not with Crouch!Moody, but rather at the Quidditch World Cup, and Harry's mind went "blissfully blank" (I don't have the book in front of me, so I'm not sure about the quote). I had the impression that therefore, the count referred to the occasions. Other thoughts ? --Francois From packsim at aol.com Fri Nov 26 14:25:17 2004 From: packsim at aol.com (packsim at aol.com) Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2004 09:25:17 EST Subject: Spy novel? maybe (was Lupin's secrets ) Message-ID: <1dd.317470fa.2ed896cd@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 118619 Del says: > I would tend to agree, if it weren't for huge counter-examples like > Riddle, and even more importantly, Peter Pettigrew. I think that with > those two examples (among others), JKR has amply demonstrated that we > simply cannot trust anyone. > > Peter was James', Sirius' and Remus' *intimate* friend. they had known > him for years, they had gone through loads and loads of things with > him, James trusted him with his very life and the life of his family, > Sirius and Remus more readily suspected each other of betrayal than > suspecting Peter. Even DD, with all his Legilimency and knowing > people's characters, doesn't seem to have ever suspected Peter. > Apparently, Peter was the last person on Earth anyone would have > suspected of turning to LV. And yet he did. Not only that, but he > managed to keep this betrayal hidden for an entire year ! > Lisa, on her first post, points out... With the Marauders, you had three wizards who seemed to excel--James, Sirius, and Remus. Three best friends who were always getting into scrapes and sometimes weren't fair. Then they had a friend who was considered a "less" wizard... Peter Pettigrew who basically seemed to tag along after them, sharing in the glory. Is it just me or is this like three other Hogwarts students who seem to excel--Harry, Ron, and Hermione who are always getting into scrapes and sometimes aren't fair. But their friend who hangs-on seems to be Neville Longbottom. Is it possible for Neville to turn to LV? LV might have had his parents crucioed into insanity, but power is one of the greatest aphrodisiacs. ~Lisa From stonehenge.orders at verizon.net Fri Nov 26 14:51:37 2004 From: stonehenge.orders at verizon.net (kjirstem) Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2004 14:51:37 -0000 Subject: When? In-Reply-To: <19C1D20F-3FA1-11D9-8F13-000A9577CB94@btconnect.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118620 Kneasy wrote: > ...said Voldemort softly. "Answer me! Imperio!" > And Harry felt *for the third time in his life*, the sensation... > (my emphases). > > Third time? > Does not compute. kjirstem: I've always wondered about that line myself. I took it to mean the number of times that he felt the sensation rather than the number of times he was Imperioed. I thought the Crouch!Moody lesson only counted as one time; on subsequent trials during the lesson perhaps the sensation was reduced from the first Imperio. I tend to think the other time was before PS/SS. I've wondered what would have happened if Lily Imperioed Harry and told him to live. We don't hear that happen in the dementor induced memories, but I'm not sure those are reliable. From mgrantwich at yahoo.com Fri Nov 26 16:47:32 2004 From: mgrantwich at yahoo.com (Magda Grantwich) Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2004 08:47:32 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041126164732.49230.qmail@web53102.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 118621 >> Magda: >> Interesting that she says "he will have SEEN things that..." >> not "he will have DONE things that..." >> Assistant-to-Voldemort's-Potion-Master!Snape sounds quite likely. > Nora: > True. But that means *minimum* of aiding-and-abetting. It also > makes it likely that he actually got to go along for the ride, > unless you want to restrict his participation to standing around > and smirking while people are killed in front of Voldie back in the > Evil Overlord Lair. Did _I_ say he hadn't done bad things? No I did not. I was pointing out that there is reason to believe that potions, Voldemort and Snape are a triangle from the past and might be one in the future too. I was not addressing the issue of absolving Snape from criminal activities. Of course he hurt and probably killed people. No question in my mind. > Nora: > I can see James' behavior towards a young Severus he > suspects > of being into the Dark Arts as a boneheaded vigilante response, > because I think those currents were probably strong back then, the > conflicts between those who were supporters of ideology Voldemort > promulgated and those who weren't--the time just before everything > really exploded into the open. Nonsense. If that had been the case, Remus and Sirius would have mentioned it when they were talking to Harry (and their purpose during that talk was to redeem James' image in Harry's eyes). It was not some misguided crusade - James was acting like a jerk and although charming and basically nice on the whole was capable of acting in a manner unworthy of him because he wasn't getting enough negative feedback for it. If it was such a principled anti-DA effort, why did he offer to ease up on Snape if Lily went out with him? Magda __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? The all-new My Yahoo! - Get yours free! http://my.yahoo.com From nkafkafi at yahoo.com Fri Nov 26 17:00:43 2004 From: nkafkafi at yahoo.com (nkafkafi) Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2004 17:00:43 -0000 Subject: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118622 > Magda: > > > Interesting that she says "he will have SEEN things that..." > > not "he will have DONE things that..." > > Assistant-to-Voldemort's-Potion-Master!Snape sounds quite likely. > Nora: > True. But that means *minimum* of aiding-and-abetting. > I find it hard to reconcile a Snape who didn't actually have to do > anything but make potions with the example (admittedly spotty) of > Regulus Black, who panicked at the demands and got killed. Neri: Actually, JKR saying here "he will have SEEN" doesn't imply at all that our dear Severus hasn't DONE anything. The reason JKR said "seen" was that she was answering the question "can Snape see thestrals?" IWO she was referring to the question if he has SEEN death. I'm not sure at all what she would have answered if asked "what kind of things has Snape DONE when he was a DE?" but as Nora wrote, the Regulus case may be some indication. Neri From azriona at juno.com Fri Nov 26 17:06:25 2004 From: azriona at juno.com (Sharon) Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2004 17:06:25 -0000 Subject: Spy novel? maybe (was Lupin's secrets ) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118623 Kneasy: > But another question occurs - are things being kept from Harry (and > therefore us) because of plot requirements - in other words because > it's *essential* that Harry not have the information before the denoument > - or has JKR set it up this way just to keep the readers guessing? Oh, totally. Remember she did say that there was a story thread that was taken out of CoS entirely because it gave away too much information too soon. She's definitely keeping stuff back from us, as well as from Harry. It's just a matter of what that information is...ESE Lupin? Dumbledore's Spy Peter? Who knows? Part of me almost hopes she doesn't tell us for a long time. After all, it took a bit of the fun out of it when we learned that Blaise really is a boy. --azriona From azriona at juno.com Fri Nov 26 17:18:50 2004 From: azriona at juno.com (Sharon) Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2004 17:18:50 -0000 Subject: Outlawed? (was Re: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118624 Casey: > Correct me if I'm wrong but are the Dark Arts actually illegal now? > (I'm at work, sorry.) I know they aren't "acceptable" but are they > outlawed? I remember Draco saying that his mother wanted him to go > to Durmstrang, and that the Dark Arts were still taught there. > I think it's only the three Unforgivables that are actually outlawed. Every other spell - it's just how you choose to implement it. I mean, if you really work at it, a Cheering Charm I suppose could be considered something of the Dark Arts, depending on how you're using it. --azriona From naama_gat at hotmail.com Fri Nov 26 17:27:05 2004 From: naama_gat at hotmail.com (naamagatus) Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2004 17:27:05 -0000 Subject: Spy novel? maybe (was Lupin's secrets ) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118625 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "delwynmarch" wrote: > > Naama wrote : > "When I said 'adequete', I meant that the basic knowledge we have of a > character (mostly on the good/evil divide) is true. That doesn't mean > we know every thing, or even every interesting thing about the > character. The question is, whether the additional information we get > will be, in some way, an extrapolation of what we already know, or > that it will undermine, subvert what we knew (thought we knew, in this > case). My argument is that JKR tends to develop her characters on a > trajectory of their basic personality, which she mostly makes known to > the reader early on. " > > Del replies : > I would tend to agree, if it weren't for huge counter-examples like > Riddle, and even more importantly, Peter Pettigrew. I think that with > those two examples (among others), JKR has amply demonstrated that we > simply cannot trust anyone. > > Peter was James', Sirius' and Remus' *intimate* friend. they had known > him for years, they had gone through loads and loads of things with > him, James trusted him with his very life and the life of his family, > Sirius and Remus more readily suspected each other of betrayal than > suspecting Peter. Even DD, with all his Legilimency and knowing > people's characters, doesn't seem to have ever suspected Peter. > Apparently, Peter was the last person on Earth anyone would have > suspected of turning to LV. And yet he did. Not only that, but he > managed to keep this betrayal hidden for an entire year ! > > I personally think that JKR set a very definite pattern of "Don't > trust anyone !" throughout her books. How exactly are you making a pattern out of one case? I think I have shown that the large majority of the HP characters are, more or less, as they appear to be. Very few - one or two - we are told have taken the path of deception, and have succeeded. If I was making an absolut kind of statement - people are always trustworthy or people never manage to hide who they really are - then one counter example would indeed prove me wrong. But I'm not saying that. I am saying that *in general* characters prove to be who they seem to be. You say that because Peter fooled his friends we must therefore not trust anyone. Why? If in RL, out of the hundreds of people you meet, one proves false - is it wise (or healthy) to conclude that you mustn't trust anyone and everyone? The same goes for the books. In five books dealing with an evil overlord and his machinations there are only two characters who are successfuly duplicitous - the evil overlord himself, and one other. Against the background of so many other WYSIWYG (in basic orientaions) characters, surely if we speak of pattern then it is that we should trust people? > > In PS/SS, Harry discovers that he's not at all who he thought he was. > He then discovers that he shouldn't take people at face value : > Hermione and Neville, for example, both clearly show him that there's > more to them than he first thought. Look - I'm making a case against ESE!Lupin, puppetmaster!DD and the like theories. Sure characters develop and may surprise us somewhat, in minor ways. That's not my point. ESE! Lupin, for instance, requires that Harry and the reader are totally mistaken about the character's basic personality. Though Harry found out that he is a wizard, did it change his perception of what sort of a person he is? >And of course, there's the whole > Snape vs. Quirrel affair. > > In CoS, Tom Riddle goes from perfect student and school hero to > machiavelic monster. Ginny goes from annoying and very minor side > character to crucial plot element. Same with Moaning Myrtle. Harry's > funny little gift, Parseltongue, becomes absolutely central to the > whole book. > > In PoA, Sirius and Peter both change from apparently being very > definitely on one side of the good/evil line to actually being on the > other side. Remus is revealed to be infinitely more than just a poor, > chronically ill and sympathetic teacher. > > By the end of PoA, JKR has clearly taught us the "Don't trust anyone > !" lesson. She then devises a test for us in GoF, in the character of > Crouch!Moody, and we all (?) walked right into the trap. We hadn't > learned our lesson. I don't understand how Ginny becoming an important plot element, Moaning Myrtle's changing role, Harry's gift or parseltongue and Remus revealed as a werewolf have any relevancy to the question of trustworthiness. I think you are mixing here several types of plot twists and surprises - and only the Sirius/Peter thing is relevant to the *type* of plot twist I'm talking about - that involving a complete reversal of the reader's understaning of a certain character (especially in terms of good/evil). Naama From Snarryfan at aol.com Fri Nov 26 15:16:37 2004 From: Snarryfan at aol.com (evita2fr) Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2004 15:16:37 -0000 Subject: When? In-Reply-To: <19C1D20F-3FA1-11D9-8F13-000A9577CB94@btconnect.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118626 Kneasy wrote: > GoF chap 34 (in the graveyard): > > ...said Voldemort softly. "Answer me! Imperio!" > And Harry felt *for the third time in his life*, the sensation... > (my emphases). > > Third time? > Does not compute. In GOF, with the Veela: "The Veela had started to dance, and Harry's mind had gone completely and blissfully blank." (chap8, p94, UK version) Christelle From jlnbtr at yahoo.com Fri Nov 26 17:00:06 2004 From: jlnbtr at yahoo.com (Juli) Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2004 09:00:06 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Spy novel? maybe (was Lupin's secrets ) In-Reply-To: <1dd.317470fa.2ed896cd@aol.com> Message-ID: <20041126170007.47471.qmail@web53110.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 118627 > Lisa: > Is it possible for Neville to turn to LV? LV might > have had his parents > crucioed into insanity, but power is one of the > greatest aphrodisiacs. > Juli: If you compare Neville to Pettigrew sure, but I don't see them even a little alike, for all we know Peter was a terrible wizard at school, and Neville isn't, sure he may screw up ocasionally but mostly because he lacks trust in himself, and he's quite good at herbology, and when he tries he can get things done. Neville hates LV and the DEs, At the DoM in OoP Neville says something like "don't give him [Malfoy] the prophesy, Let him kill me" or something like that (sorry don't have exact quote), when I first read this I thought Wow, that's very cool of him, he rathers die or be tortured than let LV get anything he really likes. I also remember when the DEs (including the Lestrange) escaped from Azkaban, Neville was furious... So, in other words No way will Neville join LV or his DEs, his wounds are too deep. Juli __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From sopraniste at yahoo.com Fri Nov 26 18:50:33 2004 From: sopraniste at yahoo.com (sopraniste) Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2004 18:50:33 -0000 Subject: Foreshadowing? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118628 Kelly wrote: > In an interview included on the DVD, JKR says there are a few parts > in the movie that foreshadow things to come in books 6 & 7. I also > remember reading somewhere (I can't find it now) that JKR asked > Cuaron to leave something in the movie becuase it was important > later in the story. As I recall, from an Entertainment Weekly article that came out around the time PoA hit the theatres, Cuaron wanted to cut Trelawny from the movie entirely, but of course JKR wouldn't allow that, because of course the Prophecy is rather vital, and points to the FIRST Prophecy (the one we find out about in OotP). Flop From alshainofthenorth at yahoo.co.uk Fri Nov 26 19:50:27 2004 From: alshainofthenorth at yahoo.co.uk (alshainofthenorth) Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2004 19:50:27 -0000 Subject: Pampering (was Re:Harry at the Dursleys) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118629 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "kjirstem" wrote: > > > > Carol: > > Sigh. You're right. We're missing the tone of voice and it's > >possible to read it your way, but given the context that you snipped, > >I read it differently. for one thing, I don't think spoiled (or > >pampered) is the same thing as loved. Look at Dudley, for example. > > > > Carol, hoping that *someone* will go upthread and respond to the > >idea that Dumbledore was right about not raising Harry as a "pampered > > little prince" > > kjirstem: > > Sorry I didn't go back to your original post, I hope you aren't upset. > I'm not particularly attached to one argument or another in this > issue, but thought I'd list some of the advantages and disadvantages > to being pampered. I'm sure this list isn't exhaustive, and I had > difficulty thinking of advantages. > > Pampering: > > Advantages: > -Feel cared for (loved?) > -Trust people more (?) > > > Disadvantages: > -Expect others to do things for you. > (perhaps therefore not learn how to do things oneself) > -Expect others to indulge your desires or feelings > -inflated sense of self-worth (?) > > On the other hand we have life with the Dursleys: > Advantages: > -stable and consistent > -learns how to do things (chores) > -goes to school > -not dead yet > > Disadvantages: > -Treated meanly > -Not told about WW, magic, parents > -Questions outlawed > Haven't had time to read HPFGU during the week, so hope people are still following this thread... One of (IMO) foremost advantages with having Harry grow up with the arch-Muggle Dursleys hasn't been mentioned in this thread at all -- by keeping Harry outside the WW, Dumbledore ensures that he isn't infected by the less healthy conventions, values and prejudices of the wizarding world until he is old enough to look at them with an open, critical mind. Don't have the books available at the moment, but consider the Yule Ball scene in GOF, when Harry says, "So what?" after being told that Hagrid is half-giant. Even the Weasleys, good people that they are, are prejudiced against werewolves. Then there is the problem with other magical beings such as house-elves, centaurs and goblins, and the Muggle problem. To put it plain, there are so many things wrong with the magical society that the knowledge of magic doesn't outweigh them. Then there's the prophecy, which suggests that Harry won't take out Voldemort through conventional magic. If the speculation that Dumbledore isn't merely aiming at destroying Voldemort, but everything that is wrong with the magical society, turns out to be correct, then I don't think that prior knowledge of magical practices and ideas is going to serve Harry at all. *empties the glass of Butterbeer and lays two Knuts on the bar* Alshain From nrenka at yahoo.com Fri Nov 26 20:01:58 2004 From: nrenka at yahoo.com (nrenka) Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2004 20:01:58 -0000 Subject: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs In-Reply-To: <20041126164732.49230.qmail@web53102.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118630 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Magda Grantwich wrote: > Madga: > Nonsense. If that had been the case, Remus and Sirius would have > mentioned it when they were talking to Harry (and their purpose > during that talk was to redeem James' image in Harry's eyes). It > was not some misguided crusade - James was acting like a jerk and > although charming and basically nice on the whole was capable of > acting in a manner unworthy of him because he wasn't getting enough > negative feedback for it. Well, as has been discussed before ad nauseam, in part because it's not exactly going to help Harry deal with the issues at that moment, who is focused (rather like Lily) on the sheer indignity and awfulness of it. I am extremely, extremely wary of arguing from absence-in-mention to absence-in-actuality in JKR's world. It's a good way of getting smacked upside the head, because she likes to not mention things and then suddenly bring them out, so we have to go back and fill them in as 'always there influencing things but we just didn't know about them'. > If it was such a principled anti-DA effort, why did he offer to > ease up on Snape if Lily went out with him? Because he's also trying to attract Lily, which is probably a little more on his mind. I don't want to make James out to be a completely consistent principled thinker, given the general tendencies of 15-year old boys. But everyone has an ideology--anyone who tells you otherwise is just unaware, or taking the ideological stance that ideologies don't matter. :) I think there were a lot of political issues rushing under the surface, and one's language and behavior certainly indicates one's politics. It makes "Because he exists" make a little more sense, as an ontological assement of Snape on James' part. Or, as I am grateful to a correspondent for the turn of phrase, "a schoolboy enactment of a visceral response that can be parsed ontologically". Existence carries with it qualities, particularly in this moderately essentialist worldview of JKR's (choices show, they don't make). We don't know whether it's true or not, but one could give me a hypothetic and expand that into "Because of what he represents, because of what he is involved with and thus is". It makes sense with a whole nexus of illustrative choices--Snape as DE, James as pureblood member of the OotP marrying a Muggleborn witch. And it's fair to try to parse all characters' words and actions for deeper meanings, right? And I screwed up the quote in my last post: it's "Fear is not just a vice, or a deformity of our character. It is the underlying psychological and moral medium that makes vice all but unavoidable". -Nora sings along: Crudele, acerba, inesorabil' morte From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Fri Nov 26 20:08:56 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2004 20:08:56 -0000 Subject: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118631 Carol earlier: > > It's not clear from the description of the scene whether > > James has his wand out already, but since Sirius has pointed > Severus out to him and James is the one who "greets" (insults) > Severus, I'm pretty sure that he does. Note the narrator's > description of Severus's reaction: > > > > "Snape reacted *so fast* that it was as though he had been > expecting *an attack*; dropping his bag, he plunged his hand inside > his robes, and his hand was halfway into the air when James shouted, > > "Expelliarmus!" (646). So even taken off guard and unarmed, > Severus is quick, but James is prepared for the *attack* and is > almost certainly already armed. So we can't judge their relative > speed in a fair fight from this scene, > > Valky: > The phrase "as though he had been expecting an attack" in no way > leads to an assumption that james was still armed. > Snape was 'expecting" an attack, from Harry's POV. This information > is gleaned by Harry, *strictly*, from Snapes reaction. If James' > wand was out before Snape moved then the POV of Harry would not be > that Snapes reaction was *as though* he had been < note the > curiosity of the narration > *expecting an attack*, surely. > The appropriate wording in the case of James' wand already being out > and aimed at Snape would be: Snape reacted quickly to the impending > attack. The attack was not obvious, James wand was not drawn or > aimed. Of that I am entirely certain. > Carol again: "As though" refers to "expecting." It in no way implies that James's wand wasn't out. You are, of course, free to be "entirely certain" about whatever you like, even an ambiguously worded description like this one. > Carol earlier: Not only has James attacked an unarmed opponent with inadequate warning, it's now two against one. > > > > I don't think that Severus was normally weaker than James alone, > > especially given his knowledge of hexes and his willingness to use > > them. It's the circumstances and the behavior of the two > Gryffindors that make Severus a victim, and James and Sirius > Bullies, in this particular instance. > > > > Valky: > With this I agree. Sirius' actions and the duo's behaviour are > exactly why this is bullying, once James gets the better of Snape he > is free title to them. Carol again: I'm not sure what you mean by "he (who?) is free title to them," but since you agree with my point, I won't pursue it. Valky wrote: > No personal intent Carol but I just don't understand why others feel > the necessity to construe the story to say that James attacked an > unarmed opponent without warning, it's overkill. The words simply > don't support it, and it doesn't change the fact that he behaved > like an Ar*e following it. Carol again: Severus didn't have his wand out. He had to scramble in his bag for it. And "All right, Snivellus!" was not sufficient warning *if* James already had his wand out. He certainly doesn't wait to cast his Expelliarmus until Severus has fully raised his wand. Severus has been studying his notes; he reacts as quickly as possible considering that his mind has been elsewhere; it seems like a conditioned reflex. But it would also seem that James's wand was out or he could not have attacked so quickly. And Sirius was also armed and entered into the conflict without warning when Severus was definitely unarmed. I can't tell whom or what you're referring to in "behaved like an A*re following it," but the behavior that follows in no way justifies an attack on an opponent who's caught off-guard and has done nothing to provoke the attack. Carol earlier: > > We really don't have James's view on this subject. He says that he > > hexes Severus "because he exists." It's the adult Sirius who > credits James with a hatred of the Dark Arts. (I wonder if he's > projecting his own hatred of his Dark Wizard parents onto Snape and > assuming that James shares his hatred. As I've noted elsewhere, > James is quite casual, and even seems surprised that Lily would > criticize him for harmlessly amusing the onlookers--his apparent > attitude, not mine!) > > > > Valky: > Overkill! Carol. James just simply isn't this bad, you just want him > to be, right? > Sirius statement about James *Hating* the Dark Arts is adamant and > sincere, How can you doubt that? Of all the things that Sirius has > said? Carol responds: Please don't impute motives to me. I don't want James to be "bad." I just think it's clear that he thinks highly of himself at this point and wants to impress Lily (and everyone else) with his hex-throwing as well as his Quidditch-throwing. I also don't think "because he exists" is any kind of motive at all, at least in no way a justifiable one. Neither is relieving Sirius's boredom by attacking someone Sirius hates. (Now if James thinks Severus is the only person who can match him in hex-hurling and is trying to create a spectacular showdown, I could at least understand that motive. But we really don't know what he thinks.) I think *Sirius* hates Severus because he associates him (and Slytherin in general) with the Dark Arts. But James didn't come from a family of Dark Wizards (AFAWK) an his parents are still alive at that point. He would have no personal motive for hating the Dark Arts or Slytherin or anyone else, including Severus Snape, whom he admits has done nothing to him at that point. James doesn't seem to be taking much of anything seriously, except the Transfiguration that he learned earlier to transfigure himself into an Animagus. Things happen later--marriage, a child, his own and his family's danger, perhaps the murder of his own parents and/or Lily's and certainly the deaths of the Order members--to change James into a much more heroic figure. But at this point, he's just (IMO) a thoughtless, inconsiderate, egotistical, arrogant little berk. He isn't vengelful like Sirius; he just doesn't think about anyone else except himself, his best buddy Sirius, being admired, and having a good time. At least as far as we can tell from this scene. BTW, the whole point of my post was to argue that Severus would probably have been a more formidable opponent in a fair fight. It has nothing to do with wanting to think badly of James--who, is, like Sirius and Severus and Remus and Peter, a fifteen-year-old boy in this scene, and very definitely not the young man he would later become. Carol, who thinks we should avoid imputing motives to each other unless those motives are directly stated From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Fri Nov 26 20:14:24 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2004 20:14:24 -0000 Subject: Guerilla ? (Re: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118632 I, Del, wrote earlier: " The second problem is that Lupin and Sirius don't mention it at all when they answer Harry's questions. They try to pass it as a childish prank. I'm not sure why they would do that. " Alla answered : "May I humbly refer you to my post 118290, where I tried to answer this question?" Del replies : You think it's because it's too early in the story ? Well, yes, it could be of course. But, hum, let's say that I'm growing progressively, er, *tired* of this explanation ;-) I'd rather find a reasonable character-driven explanation. And in fact, there's one. It's quite far-fetched, but it could work. It is possible that DD told Remus and Sirius to avoid doing anything that might further antagonise Harry to Snape, because it is crucially important that Harry let Snape teach him Occlumency. In that light, it becomes obvious that telling Harry that James and Sirius attacked Snape because he was a junior DE was the last thing to do. Moreover, if you're right and Snape hadn't done anything *yet*, then James and Sirius *were* out of bounds, no matter how pure their intentions. That would further explain why Sirius seems a bit embarassed. But we definitely need to know more, because as I said in my previous post, JKR hasn't told us that Snape *ever* did anything while in school. It's possible, maybe probable, but for now it's still a supposition. Del From shrtbusryder2002 at yahoo.com Fri Nov 26 20:48:05 2004 From: shrtbusryder2002 at yahoo.com (Jason) Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2004 20:48:05 -0000 Subject: When? In-Reply-To: <19C1D20F-3FA1-11D9-8F13-000A9577CB94@btconnect.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118633 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Barry Arrowsmith wrote: > A question I've asked before - not only that, it's a question > that was asked long before I joined the site - that hasn't > received a convincing answer. Maybe some of the newer > members can come up with an idea or two. > > GoF chap 34 (in the graveyard): > > ...said Voldemort softly. "Answer me! Imperio!" > And Harry felt *for the third time in his life*, the sensation... > (my emphases). > > Third time? > Does not compute. > > Crouch!Moody put Harry through his paces "four times in a row" and > Voldy makes five. > > If you take occasions rather than the number of spells, then I can > only count two (the Unforgivables lesson, the graveyard). > > Alternatives: > 1. It's a "flint", > 2. Sometime either during the four books up to the end of GoF or even > sometime before PS/SS starts, Harry has been Imperioed without it being > obvious ( or mentioned) to us. > > Suggestions sought. > > Kneasy I Dont have my GOF so I really wished you'd finished that sentence about the sensation. Perhaps the first occurs during charms when they learn the cheering charm. "the cheering charm had left them with a feeling of great contentment." Doesnt the imperius curse cause you to feel blissful and content? So, Cheering Charm 1 Learning Imperius 2 Graveyard 3. Maybe. Jason From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Fri Nov 26 21:04:18 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2004 21:04:18 -0000 Subject: Lupin's secrets was Re: Two Wormtails In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118634 Jen wrote: > And there is a mystery component this series, even as I don't > believe this is ultimately a spy novel. Certainly both sides > employ 'operatives' whose job it is to infiltrate enemy territory > and report back information. We have numerous accounts of the DE's > infiltrating the MOM. It's not beyond belief that Dumbledore also > has agents who gather information for him, even if they don't > personally become DE's to do so. Carol responds: I realize that Fudge is not the most reliable source of information, but he says straight out that "Dumbledore had many useful spies." We can safely include Sneape and possibly Mundungus Fletcher among these spies. (Probably Fudge didn't know the identity of the spies or they'd have been much less useful, but I see no reason to question the accuracy of his statement.) If DD had "many useful spies" during VW1, he probably still has them. And I don't merely mean spies within Hogwarts, like the portraits, who apparently report to Dumbledore just as Snape does. Maybe that's what Lupin is doing for the Order--not as a DE but as an unemployed DADA and known werewolf who can frequent places inaccessibly to Snape (or McGonagall) during the school year. I wouldn't be surprised if Tonks, with her metamorphmagus abilities, is also a spy. Carol, still wondering if Tonks can transform herself to resemble a real person, male or female, or only imaginary somewhat older women with hair and noses different from her own From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Fri Nov 26 21:38:28 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2004 21:38:28 -0000 Subject: Spy novel? maybe (was Lupin's secrets ) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118635 Naama wrote : "How exactly are you making a pattern out of one case? " Del replies : I wasn't. I first mentioned that we had 2 examples of untrustworthy characters who first seemed worthy. Then I stated that JKR set a pattern of unworthiness, and proceeded to explain it. My statement wasn't related to Peter's example, but to the list that followed. I realise now it didn't necessarily read that way, and I apologise for the confusion. Naama wrote : "I think I have shown that the large majority of the HP characters are, more or less, as they appear to be. Very few - one or two - we are told have taken the path of deception, and have succeeded." Del replies : Two is already a lot, ocnsidering that there aren't that many important characters. Moreover, none of these untrustworthy characters happen to be close to Harry. LV was Tom Riddle long before the HP saga began, and Pettigrew changed sides during the times of James Potter. Harry hasn't experienced *first-hand* the horror of intimate betrayal. I really wouldn't be surprised if that was one of the tough things JKR has in store for him. Naama wrote : " You say that because Peter fooled his friends we must therefore not trust anyone. Why? If in RL, out of the hundreds of people you meet, one proves false - is it wise (or healthy) to conclude that you mustn't trust anyone and everyone? The same goes for the books." Del replies : Peter wasn't just someone the Marauders met. He was *one of them*. He knew their most intimate secrets, he shared in their most illegal adventures. James trusted his life and the life of his family to him. In short, he was *above suspicion*. If he, who was above suspicion, proved untrustworthy, how can we assume that anybody else is trustworthy ? Moreover, he didn't just "prove false" : he deliberately sent the Potter family to their death, and if he knew about the Prophecy, he even set out to allow the entire world, both WW and Muggle World, to be dominated by an evil wizard. That's no small betrayal. Peter was as close to James as Ron and Hermione are to Harry. And yet, James *shouldn't* have trusted Peter as he did. So how can we assume that Harry is safe trusting Ron and Hermione, let alone anyone else ? JKR has shown us that the links of family and friendship are not unbreakable in her books. But if you can't be sure of your friends and your family, then *who* can you be sure of ? As many keep repeating, there's a war going on. And during a war, the smallest mistake (trusting Peter) can produce the biggest disaster. Nobody can afford to make careless mistakes in a war. Harry cannot make the mistake of assuming that all the White Hats are trustworthy. I hope they are, Harry can hope they are, but he shouldn't *assume* that they are. Naama wrote : " Against the background of so many other WYSIWYG (in basic orientaions) characters, surely if we speak of pattern then it is that we should trust people? " Del replies : Nope. In OoP, DD got chased out of Hogwarts for that very reason. If Harry and Hermione had done their job properly and checked the background of every prospective DA member, then they would immediately have spotted Marrietta's huge liability, and they would at least have had a talk with her. But because they assumed that whoever accepted to belong to the DA must be trustworthy, they allowed a disaster to happen. A disaster that nearly resulted in their deaths ultimately. Naama wrote : " Look - I'm making a case against ESE!Lupin, puppetmaster!DD and the like theories. Sure characters develop and may surprise us somewhat, in minor ways. That's not my point. ESE!Lupin, for instance, requires that Harry and the reader are totally mistaken about the character's basic personality." Del replies : I understand. But I brought up my arguments to show that Harry doesn't know how to analyse people's personality and events accurately, not even his own. He keeps dismissing details if they don't fit in his general understanding of people and events. He assumes that people are the way he understands them, and never stops to consider that maybe he is completely mistaken. With ESE!Lupin, Pippin brought to light a series of details that don't seem to fit in completely with our general understanding of Lupin. Harry never stops to consider them because they don't fit in the way he thinks Lupin is. He assumes he got Lupin right, and that if Lupin wasn't who Harry thinks he is, other people would notice and tell him. People like DD or Sirius, for example. People who never noticed that Peter wasn't who they thought he was. People who got other people wrong at times : Sirius thought Remus might be the traitor, DD thought Sirius was the traitor. So I really don't think it is safe for Harry to rely on the judgement of people who have already proved that their judgement isn't always accurate. Incuding himself. As an aside : it is particularly telling that Sirius thought Remus might be the traitor. We are not told what led Sirius to think that. But we are told what apparently convinced Sirius that Lupin was OK : Sirius found another traitor. But logically, that shouldn't have been a reason for Sirius to stop doubting Remus, if he had any reason to. The fact that Peter was guilty didn't absolve Remus. Naama wrote : " I don't understand how Ginny becoming an important plot element, Moaning Myrtle's changing role, Harry's gift or parseltongue and Remus revealed as a werewolf have any relevancy to the question of trustworthiness. I think you are mixing here several types of plot twists and surprises - and only the Sirius/Peter thing is relevant to the *type* of plot twist I'm talking about - that involving a complete reversal of the reader's understaning of a certain character (especially in terms of good/evil). " Del replies : My examples are relevant because they show that Harry and the reader shouldn't trust their understanding of things and people. If I understand you correctly, you're discussing whether characters are inherently trustworthy. You're discussing whether Lupin is or is not trustworthy. The problem is that this sort of question doesn't lead us anywhere, because there's only one person who knows the answer : that's JKR, and she hasn't told us yet. And as long as she doesn't tell us, it's our personal decision to decide for ourselves whether we want to trust Lupin or not. But this is not what ESE!Lupin is about. A theory is not about our personal convictions. It's about what could be, according to canon. So, *could* Lupin be ESE according to canon ? Is it *possible* that the odd details be signs, even if Harry isn't reading them ? I know that this kind of reasoning leads straight to paranoia. But in a war, paranoia can actually become a quality. I believe that's one reason JKR invented Mad-Eye Moody. Del, who wonders if the Potters couldn't have used of themselves (James or Lily) as SK. From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Fri Nov 26 21:59:00 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2004 21:59:00 -0000 Subject: Guerilla ? (Re: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118636 Valky wrote : "I recall not long ago, Del that you made here an excellent case for the Hero/Saving people thing over compassion in Harry. I was compelled by your argument to alter my opinion. I know see quite well that Harry *has* the saving people thing, to a large extent over compassion for others suffering and I have lifted the blueprint you gave me and laid it over James profile. It's a perfect match. You might call it Guerilla war tactics but I see a classic case of hero complex, in the framework that you laid out. ie saving people that didnt ask to be saved, marching in to overpower a percieved threat without actually considering the whole picture... sounds like the "Guerilla theory" of the worst meory to me." Del replies : Interesting ! Saving people who didn't ask to be saved sure sounds like what happened when Snape insulted Lily. It also reminds me of the Long-Teeth!Hermione episode in GoF (just came accross it today), when Harry set out to punish Draco for insulting Hermione, even though Hermione didn't ask him. It would be fascinating if Harry and his father happened to share the same saving-people thing. Considering that James didn't get a chance to raise Harry, I would have to wonder how come Harry inherited such a character trait. Did James leave a bit of himself in Harry, the way some people think that Lily left a bit of herself in her son ? And could I use that as ammunition in my DesignedWeapon!Harry theory ? Hmmm, interesting... Valky wrote : "James didn't see Snape, he saw the Dark Arts and nothing more, and he thought he could save the world by lightening their hearts against it. Snape was *convenient* as long as he carried the "I believe in the Dark Side" banner in James mind, he didn't really exist only the banner did and it was James anti-flag. So he burned it. I guess that explains how I see it, a bit." Del replies : My question now, is whether Harry will learn to avoid making the same kind of mistake. Valky wrote : " Lily Lily.... we really should dissect her part in it like we have everyone else's." Del replies : Try dissecting Lily as much as you want, but JKR has made it clear that she's keeping the really juicy stuff for later. I posted some time ago about Lily's role in the Worst Memory, but it didn't get very far if I remember well. Del From ginnysthe1 at yahoo.com Fri Nov 26 22:01:41 2004 From: ginnysthe1 at yahoo.com (ginnysthe1) Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2004 22:01:41 -0000 Subject: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118637 Ces attributed the following quote to Carol (justcarol): "This part I agree with completely." Carol noted: I did write this sentence. Then the quote continued: "On the other hand, Snape's bullying behavior may have begun at first as retaliation for the nasty way Sirius and James had treated him for being ugly, odd, greasy, etc." Carol responded: The bracketed [Kim above now uses quotation marks instead of brackets] words, snipped by Ces, are Kim's. (I would never call Snape ugly. Granted, he should wash his hair and bleach his teeth, but an aquiline nose could be considered aristocratic, and the adult Snape is no longer skinny and round-shouldered. . . . I digress.) Kim now: Yes, that quote was mine. But I didn't really mean to call Snape ugly, and definitely not on account of his large nose (of course, maybe I was thinking of A. Rickman's large nose, which I adore...) which could be aristocratic, though that would be a matter of complete indifference to me. In my quote above I was trying to use adjectives that Sirius or James might have used to describe the greasy-haired, skinny, round-shouldered oddball Severus that they knew at the time I was referring to. I could imagine Sirius and James thinking Severus ugly, no matter what my opinion is of his appearance. But I agree with Carol that Severus/Snape ought to wash his hair, though not bleach his teeth. Just brushing them would do (that is, if lack of brushing is the reason they look the way they do -- I can't recall right now what canon said about Severus/Snape's teeth). Anyway I'm not sure the WW would have tooth bleach and IMO it tends to make people's teeth look unnaturally white. I've told my own dentist as much, without voicing my suspicion that he's really just out to make a buck. In any case, to each his or her own. Talk about digressing. Quote resumed: "...all speculating at this point. I think that Sirius, for example, associated Severus with what he hated about his own home and family, which (for me) explains his vindictiveness. He may even have rejected that hatred of the Dark Arts onto James as an explanation of why he disliked Severus. But James seems to be entertaining himself (and Sirius) by bullying Severus in the Pensieve scene. He dislikes him, certainly, but he doesn't seem to share Sirius's virulent hatred."> Carol responded: Okay, these are my words (snipped by Ces). Ces wrote (in response to the above quote from Carol): But what about the remark that James made to Lily about Severus just existing? That would seem to be a remark to come more from Sirius than James, if Black does hate Severus more than James did. Whatever did Severus do to James to make a remark like that? Carol responded: I don't think we can assume from James's words that Severus did anything. It seems like a feeble excuse to me--and to Lily as well, apparently. Even if Severus deserved James's dislike, and I see no indication *in this scene* that he did, he certainly didn't deserve an unprovoked attack by two opponents who caught him off guard. And no one deserves to be attacked "because they exist." Kim now: This I agree with completely. I might add, in response to Ces, that bullying behavior is often "provoked" by what seems to be the mere existence of a particular person. What the bully doesn't say outloud (usually) is what about that person's "existence" makes the bully want to attack him (or her). I think it's often as Carol conjectured, that the "victim" reminds the bully of something he (the bully) is ashamed of or hates about himself. Then Carol signed off: Carol, requesting that posters be a bit more careful in their snipping and attributions Kim now: I agree with Carol's sign-off completely too. :-) Kim From alshainofthenorth at yahoo.co.uk Fri Nov 26 22:02:28 2004 From: alshainofthenorth at yahoo.co.uk (alshainofthenorth) Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2004 22:02:28 -0000 Subject: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs In-Reply-To: <20041126164732.49230.qmail@web53102.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118638 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Magda Grantwich wrote: > > > Nora: > > I can see James' behavior towards a young Severus he > > suspects > > of being into the Dark Arts as a boneheaded vigilante response, > > because I think those currents were probably strong back then, the > > conflicts between those who were supporters of ideology Voldemort > > promulgated and those who weren't--the time just before everything > > really exploded into the open. Magda: > Nonsense. If that had been the case, Remus and Sirius would have > mentioned it when they were talking to Harry (and their purpose > during that talk was to redeem James' image in Harry's eyes). It was > not some misguided crusade - James was acting like a jerk and > although charming and basically nice on the whole was capable of > acting in a manner unworthy of him because he wasn't getting enough > negative feedback for it. > > If it was such a principled anti-DA effort, why did he offer to ease > up on Snape if Lily went out with him? > > Magda > Alshain: I'm in the camp for people who don't want Remus and Sirius to try to justify themselves or give Harry a series of valid excuses for why it was right for them to behave the way they did, any more than I want them to find mitigating circumstances or excuse themselves. Both attempts are morally reprehensible, but "The end justifies the means" is IMO worse than "He started it." The former implies that you had a right, a duty even, to behave like an a******e. And it goes against the morals that Remus ("Do you really think anyone deserves that?") *and* Sirius ("But then a lot of people who were against the Dark side...") have been trying to instil in Harry. I can certainly see why they wouldn't be proud of the actions of their teenage selves, even given a belief that they were the Justice League of Hogwarts. While I agree with the vigilante theory, I don't think that there's one single, simple, sufficient explanation for the Pensieve scene. In an attempt to justify the lameness of Moony and Padfoot when Harry demanded explanations, they don't seem to be at their best in that scene, do they? Is it a combination of surprise, guilty conscience, and faded memories? Harry's experience of the memory was still raw, but Lupin and Black have had twenty years for the long-term memory to work its little retconning tricks. If you've told yourself for twenty years that "you weren't that bad *really*" while you were reconstructing the story of your life, and then are faced with evidence that "yes, you *were* that bad *really*", you're probably going to come a little bit unstuck. Alshain From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Fri Nov 26 22:05:37 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2004 22:05:37 -0000 Subject: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118639 Valky wrote : "I find totally strange that Sirius after all we know of him could come across as a calculating murderer. That to me is no possibility. If there is anything I think we know about Sirius now it is his heart, and his heart is lonely, vulnerable and bitter, but not cold. In the context of a bitter rampage without thought to consequence I can see Snape could have a point, but his statement is intended as point to a cold feelingless evil Sirius, so I am sure he is not right about that." Del replies : I see what you mean. However, as you pointed out in another post, it could be that Sirius had very deep issues where the Dark Arts were concerned. So is it really impossible that he would have considered Snape to be so dangerous that he would have seized the opportunity to rid the world of him ? I wouldn't put it past him. Del From ginnysthe1 at yahoo.com Fri Nov 26 22:19:57 2004 From: ginnysthe1 at yahoo.com (ginnysthe1) Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2004 22:19:57 -0000 Subject: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118640 Kim here, snipping liberally at post no. 118557 in order to ask a few specific questions: Valky wrote: The phrase "as though he had been expecting an attack" in no way leads to an assumption that James was still armed. Snape was 'expecting" an attack, from Harry's POV. This information is gleaned by Harry, *strictly*, from Snapes reaction. If James' wand was out before Snape moved, then the POV of Harry would not be that Snapes reaction was *as though* he had been *expecting an attack*, surely. The appropriate wording in the case of James' wand already being out and aimed at Snape would be: Snape reacted quickly to the impending attack. The attack was not obvious, James wand was not drawn or aimed. Of that I am entirely certain. Kim asks now: Has anyone else wondered, as I do now, whether we can really trust the POV of pensieve scenes? After all, the pensieve scene in this case is Snape's memory of what happened between him and James and Sirius at the lake many years ago. Could Snape's memory of what actually happened be a little fuzzy? Actually this scene is several- layered -- it's the author/narrator's view of Harry's view of Snape's memory... (isn't it?) Kim From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Fri Nov 26 22:47:42 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2004 22:47:42 -0000 Subject: Mollycoddling (was Re: Harry at the Dursleys / DD's feelings about it) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118641 Del wrote: > > I didn't know the word "mollycoddling" when I first met Molly. But > > when I discovered that word and figured its meaning, I immediately > > realised it was another name-joke on the part of JKR. > Geoff responded: > > > Interestingly, I followed this up and found that (1) Molly is a pet > form of Mary but also, (2) in the analysis of "mollycoddle", the > first part of this is given as a word for "girl". Carol notes: A "mollycoddle" is an effeminate boy. "Mollycoddle" as a verb is of course to indulge and pamper. I gather from this that "mollycoddle" as a verb originally meant to treat a boy like a girl, that is, to overprotect him. I'm not talking, of course, about modern childrearing methods. But in the nineteenth century and before, boys were exposed to social evils that girls were protected from: drinking, gambling, swearing, and prostitution being the ones that come immediately to mind. Boys were expected to "sow their wild oats" and then settle down to marry a "good" woman--i.e., one who knew little or nothing about sex or any other things I've mentioned. Anne Bronte protested both forms of "education" as deleterious in "The Tenant of Wildfell Hall." She's protesting both the complete ignorance expected of girls, who were assumed to be either stupid or morally fragile and subject to temptation, and the exposure of boys to social evils with neither guidance nor protection. She seems to be advocating a middle way for children of both sexes--awareness of the obstacle without direct exposure to them, and guidance around or over the obstacles when they inevitably arise. A similar question faces the Order members and Dumbledore in OoP. How much should Harry be told? How much guidance should he receive, and what kind? Should he be left in ignorance of obstacles and evils or exposed to them and forced to deal with them on his own? The decision to teach Harry Occlumency seems to be an attempt at a middle way--a means of dealing with an obstacle without actually being told what the obstacle is (the Prophecy orb in the MoM). If we remove the idea of being treated like a (nineteenth-century) girl and consider "mollycoddling" as both pampering and sheltering from evil, that may well be what Molly is trying to do to Harry (and her younger children, Ginny included). It isn't just a matter of keeping them ignorant; she also (understandably) wants to keep them safe. (Witness, for example, her reaction to the age line in GoF; she was glad that her children couldn't cross it and upset that it hadn't protected Harry.) In contrast, Dumbledore seems to want Harry to face various obstacles, from the riddles and challenges involved in saving the Philosopher's Stone to the dragons and mazes of the TWT, using his own wits and whatever resources are available, from his friends' knowledge and abilities to the helpful intervention of Fawkes. But even he "mollycoddles" Harry by not telling him about the Prophecy and why he needs to stop that dream. In any case, I don't think the name Molly is an accident, nor do I think that JKR approves of mollycoddling in any form. Evidently, since she had Dumbledore confess that he was wrong to hide the Prophecy from Harry, she doesn't wholly approve of exposure to obstacles without guidance, either. But still, she views Dumbledore as the epitome of goodness, and he certainly has allowed Harry to face perils much worse than the abuse/neglect of the Dursleys, and even encouraged him to do so by giving him the invisibility cloak when he was still only eleven. IMO, the time for the "let Harry alone" policy has passed. It's time he received some actual guidance, some genuine sound advice, or at least a good history lesson regarding Grindelwald, Voldemort, and Dark Wizards in general. Enough with the Goblin Wars. Harry and the others need a big dose of twentieth-century history, in particular VW1, and some hands-on DADA training from an expert instead of trying to teach themselves. Carol From ginnysthe1 at yahoo.com Fri Nov 26 22:49:48 2004 From: ginnysthe1 at yahoo.com (ginnysthe1) Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2004 22:49:48 -0000 Subject: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118642 Valky had written in reply to Carol(?): The phrase "as though he had been expecting an attack" in no way leads to an assumption that James was still armed. The attack was not obvious, James wand was not drawn or aimed. Of that I am entirely certain. Potioncat responded to Valky: Just to clarify, James calls out "All right, Snivelus?" Do you think Severus was wrong to go for his wand? Looking at the description of Sirius and Peter, James was up to something, we can see it, and Severus must have had reason to expect it. Then Potioncat quoted part of Valky's post: "Valky: No personal intent, Carol, but I just don't understand why others feel the necessity to construe the story to say that James attacked an unarmed opponent without warning, it's overkill. The words simply don't support it, and it doesn't change the fact that he behaved like an Ar*e following it." Potioncat responded (to Valky): Well, James did Expelliarmus, then Sirius did another curse. What do you call it? I would be willing to consider Expelliarmus defense, except that it doesn't stop there and at that point all Severus had done was to pull his wand to defend himself. Then Potioncat quoted Valky again: "Valky: Overkill! Carol. James just simply isn't this bad, you just want him to be, right? Sirius statement about James *Hating* the Dark Arts is adamant and sincere, How can you doubt that? Of all the things that Sirius has said?" Potioncat responded: Even if Sirius is correct and the reason for James' dislike of Severus is due to Dark Arts, it doesn't excuse this incident. I am of the opinion that there is more to learn about this and I've seen Sirius be wrong before. I've not certain that knowing Dark Arts is any worse than hexing people just because you can. I know James will go on to become a very good person, but I stand by my opinion that he is not a good person in this scene. Kim now: I think what may be missing in our interpretations is that in this scene James sees Severus in the light of his and Severus's own personal history together, a history which we can't see from our reader's POV. As a possible history, I'll offer this: After they first met one another, it somehow became apparent to James that Severus was a pureblood snob. Severus may be a "shabby-genteel" pureblood snob (hence the dingy underpants?), but he's a snob nonetheless. And pure-blood James doesn't like snobs. Why this is so, I've no idea, but I think it is so. (Also, pureblood Sirius doesn't like snobs either, does he, hence part of the reason for his dislike of his own family?) Anyhow, over several years James has fallen for the mudblood young witch Lily and has also realized somehow that Severus, against his own "better" pureblood judgment, likes her as well. (Lily may realize these same things about Severus, but she's not prone to be actively cruel to Severus in the way James and Sirius are). So when Severus walks by the groups of kids that are sitting near the lake, James uses the opportunity first, to get revenge on his "rival" to Lily's affections, and second, to "ice the cake" by humiliating a shabby-genteel pureblood who has dared to be hypcritical enough to hanker after the mudblood girl that James has already chosen for himself. In that light, the scene is entirely plausible (not that the behavior on the part of James and Sirius is any more justifieable). Any thoughts? Kim From gbannister10 at aol.com Fri Nov 26 23:19:53 2004 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2004 23:19:53 -0000 Subject: Harry's developing behaviour - average or unique? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118643 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "paul_terzis" wrote: > Snow: > > Your post, Geoff, was extraordinary! I appreciate a man's point of > > view and can agree except where it involves Harry's acute actions to > > his feelings in OOP. I agree that it could be a typical teenage angst > > but this boy has voices in his head that isn't normal in any > > spectrum. These voices haven't been exactly pinned down as to whom > > they are but we do know that a piece of Voldemort is inside of Harry. > > In this case we are not dealing with a real world conception of the > > typical teenager, male or female. There is nothing typical about > > Harry or his background let alone his future. > > It can be typical for any teenager (even those you think would > > never ) to behave in an unusual fashion but Harry is different > > despite Dumbledore's protective blockers to keep him as normal a boy > > as he could hope for. Harry is just not the A typical teenager, and > > I don't think we should perceive him as such. > > Even Dumbledore does not underestimate Harry's behavior as his own > > when he refuses to look at Harry, for the majority of the year, > > because of the intense presence of Voldemort that lies within. Paul: > I agree with Snow. Harry is not exactly the average teenager. In > addition to the typical teenage angst, he has some aggravating > factors. He had been abused emotionally ang mentally enough for a > lifetime by his "caring family". He faced more than once near-death > situations. There is a maniac, powerful, evil wizard who with his gang > who consists of sadists murderers seeks to kill Harry and everyone > near Harry in every possible opportunity. He had already lost his > parents and his godfather by this maniac. Well to be honest I am > really surprised that Harry is acting so mildly until now. I was > expected more violent outbursts from him in OOTP. Maybe JKR tries to > outline Harry's story as parralel for the dilemmas and opposite for > the choices to that of Voldermort. Of course that remains to be seen > in book 6 and book 7. Geoff: After I sent my lead post in this thread, which I did after a great deal of thought and drafting, I realised that I had in fact set myself up with a paradox by naming the thread "average or unique?" My mind went back to my days at teacher training college when, on one occasion, our Maths and Psychology lecturer said to us: "There is no such thing as an average person. the normal person does not exist." This set us back on our heels until we realised what he meant. Any average is an aggregate of results either side of the norm. Our references to an average person pre-supposes a set of norms which would be considered usual; but no one person conforms to the full set. We are /all/ unique which of course I would acknowledge when wearing my Christian hat. The point I was trying to make is that Harry is no more abnormal than the average teenager. He has had a very rough passage at times but many young people in the Real World have difficult journeys into adolescence and can make them equally angry or conversely remarkably placid. When I look at some of the young people I come into regular contact with in church organisations, I can highlight both cases. I can quote an example of a young teen who has a mother with disabilities and helps to get her up and dressed in the morning and to bed at night, often on his own. His father has walked out on the family, but he still goes on quietly - no shouting or screaming. Maybe in a year or so, he may start to kick over the traces; as Paul remarks, Harry has been mild for a long period up to his Fifth Year but this is not necessarily unique. Again, I think of a church family of seven, four of whom are teenagers and every one reacts in a different way to a situation - some scream and fuss, some remain calm, others walk away pretending the event hasn't happened. The last example is a boy who has just seen his parents divorce - very messily, very publicly in front of the children. He is very much in CapsLock mode carrying a lot of anger to contend with. reminiscent of Harry. The point I am trying to make is that Harry, although he has been dealt a bad hand, is not unique in the way he has reacted. I think by the end of OOTP, he is beginning to lose his head of steam. In canon I see evidence that he is starting to wind down gradually: "Perhaps the reason he wanted to be alone was because he had felt isolated from everybody since his talk with Dumbledore. An invisible barrier separated him from the rest of the world. He was - he had always been - a marked man. It was just that he had never really understood what that meant... And yet sitting here on the edge of the lake, with the terrible weight of grief dragging at him, with the loss of Sirius so raw and fresh inside, he could not muster any great sense of fear." (OOTP "The Second War Begins" p. 754 UK edition) "She walked away from him and, as he watched her go, he found that the terrible weight in his stomach seemd to have lessened slightly." (ibid. p.761) "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 hurryign along in his wake." (ibid. p.766) 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 begining 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 dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Fri Nov 26 23:25:03 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2004 23:25:03 -0000 Subject: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118644 Carol: I think *Sirius* hates Severus because he associates him (and Slytherin in general) with the Dark Arts. But James didn't come from a family of Dark Wizards (AFAWK) an his parents are still alive at that point. He would have no personal motive for hating the Dark Arts or Slytherin or anyone else, including Severus Snape, whom he admits has done nothing to him at that point. James doesn't seem to be taking much of anything seriously, except the Transfiguration that he learned earlier to transfigure himself into an Animagus. Alla: We don't know whether James had personal motive for hating Dark Arts or not. All we know that he always hated them. I can very easily come up with personal motive for James - let's say his family were Aurors and someone WAS killed by DE. We also don't know how seriously James took things when he was fifteen. Nora: I don't want to make James out to be a completely consistent principled thinker, given the general tendencies of 15-year old boys. But everyone has an ideology--anyone who tells you otherwise is just unaware, or taking the ideological stance that ideologies don't matter. :) Alla: WORD, Nora. I remember myself at sixteen and I have to tell you my political views were very well formed at that time. Del : I see what you mean. However, as you pointed out in another post, it could be that Sirius had very deep issues where the Dark Arts were concerned. So is it really impossible that he would have considered Snape to be so dangerous that he would have seized the opportunity to rid the world of him ? I wouldn't put it past him. Alla: Of course we cannot put anything past any character at this point, BUT I tend to agree with Valky - I can see Sirius wanting to kill Severus in the heat of the moment, I absolutely don't see him PLANNING the murder. Of course, JMO. From ginnysthe1 at yahoo.com Fri Nov 26 23:30:40 2004 From: ginnysthe1 at yahoo.com (ginnysthe1) Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2004 23:30:40 -0000 Subject: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118645 catkind wrote: The way I read this scene, James and Sirius weren't planning a fight, they were planning a taunting session, a la Draco Malfoy/famille Dursley. Then they are pleased when Snape draws his wand because it gives them an excuse to use magic against him. Even more so when Snape gets his slashing-hex in. My impression was, if Snape hadn't gone for his wand, nor would James and Sirius have. Yes, it can also be read the other way: "All right, Snivellus?" calls James, to call Snape's attention to the wands pointing at him. My opinion: whichever way it happened, it doesn't change the fact that J&S are in the wrong. I always want to compare this scene to the scene where Draco first confronts Harry about Malfoy sr. being in prison, at the end of OotP: Harry is taunting Malfoy, basically, even though Malfoy "started it". Malfoy goes for his wand. Harry gets to his first. I wonder what would have happened next if Snape hadn't intervened. Judging by Harry's later actions, something pretty unpleasant would have happened to Malfoy at this point. The author seems to condemn James and Sirius' actions, but not to notice anything wrong with what Harry does to Malfoy in the various incidents in OotP. Is this something Harry hasn't noticed yet, or does Rowling really see a difference, a valid excuse for doing nasty things to Malfoy? Or is the Harry/Draco dynamic pure Tom-and-Jerry light relief, outside the moral framework? If "he started it" is a valid excuse, James and Sirius would have a valid excuse at least in my first reading. If "he's a nasty piece of work" is a valid excuse, you could say James and Sirius would have a valid excuse full stop. If "two against one" is what makes it wrong, what about Harry and twin/DA vs Draco/Draco and goons? I'd be interested in what people think about the relative seriousness of the offences "he insulted my parent/best mate/greasy nose", "he hexed me" and "he punched me" in this world. Otherwise it's hard to judge what is considered just retaliation for what and by whom. Kim responds now: Hi, catkind (kind to cats? like a cat?). I just made another post discussing possible motivations for James and Sirius bullying Severus in the pensieve scene. See what you think (though I don't have the post no. handy, it was real close to this one). As to Harry vs. Draco, I do think there's a similarity to Harry's father James vs. Severus Snape. But I don't think it's quite the same situation. I think Harry dislikes Draco for various justifiable reasons, not the least of which is Draco's obvious snobbery towards Harry's mate Ron. It also may have been obvious to Harry at the outset that Draco's offer of "friendship" was hypocritical or insincere (and it probably was -- after all Harry isn't a pureblood) and that maybe Draco only wants to befriend him because he's the "boy who lived." In any case Harry rejects Draco's offer. And so the "history" between these two began at the beginning of the books. Ever after that they could *both* claim that universal childhood excuse of "He started it." And that's supposedly where the adults are supposed to step in and teach the kids how to behave civilly to one another, in spite of possibly justifiable mutual dislikes. But it (adult intervention) doesn't happen very often in any of the books from what I can recall. Draco tends to be a taunter, a provocateur, whereas Harry is a reactor. But when Harry (and Ron, Hermione, et al.) react to Draco's hateful taunts, they tend to get in trouble with the teachers, but Draco doesn't (not usually anyway). Maybe the school still abides by that old saying "Sticks and stones may break my bones, but words can never hurt me," a saying which IMO has never been quite true. Words can hurt a lot, as we all know -- they can hurt to the point that someone (especially and understandably when that someone is not yet an adult, e.g. Harry, Ron, Hermione, or even Draco) can feel no recourse but to haul off and pound the hurler of the cruel words (or have his goons pound the hurler for him). Anyway, please chime in if you agree, disagree, etc. Kim From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Fri Nov 26 23:51:32 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2004 23:51:32 -0000 Subject: Guerilla ? (Re: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118646 > Del replies : You think it's because it's too early in the story ? Well, yes, it could be of course. But, hum, let's say that I'm growing progressively, er, *tired* of this explanation ;-) I'd rather find a reasonable character-driven explanation. Alla: Well,yes, I do. Sorry! I understand you being tired of this one (I am too,actually), but we cannot get away from the fact that there are two more books to go, do we? Again, the example of Harry not asking questions about his parents, I think clearly shows such possibility. Of course just as you, I also prefer character driven explanation. Del: > It is possible that DD told Remus and Sirius to avoid doing anything that might further antagonise Harry to Snape, because it is crucially important that Harry let Snape teach him Occlumency. In that light, it becomes obvious that telling Harry that James and Sirius attacked Snape because he was a junior DE was the last thing to do. Alla: Curious, very curious. It may work, but how would Dumbledore know that Harry will want to have such conversation in the first place, or did you mean that he just gave Sirius and remus general warning - if past comes up in the conversations with Harry, don't dive into it too much. Del: Moreover, if you're right and Snape hadn't done anything *yet*, then James and Sirius *were* out of bounds, no matter how pure their intentions. That would further explain why Sirius seems a bit embarassed. Alla: Oh, I have no doubt that they WERE out of bounds regardless of their intentions, I just think that their intentions were more than we know about yet. From ginnysthe1 at yahoo.com Sat Nov 27 00:12:27 2004 From: ginnysthe1 at yahoo.com (ginnysthe1) Date: Sat, 27 Nov 2004 00:12:27 -0000 Subject: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118647 Kim here, stepping in with her own point of view... Valky's fuller quote, written in response to potioncat: I have had this discussion before, potioncat. Have you checked your HP timeline lately? Why? In the time of the reign of Voldemort, when a mad "DARK ARTS" wizard is killing anyone and any innocent thing he comes across, this is the time we are referring to. How can you possibly question whether the Dark Arts are worse than childish pranks. He is killing people, potioncat. It's like asking a semite if they'd rather a brown coat in their house or a frog in their bed. Your question is ridiculous. Sorry, potioncat I am getting a bit personal there. I don't mean to bite, it's just a pretty significant point to me. Hickengruendler responded to Valky: Is he [killing people, added by Kim]? Well, maybe yes, as a Death Eater, that's possible. But I'm sure he wasn't killing people as a student. If he were, and everybody would have known that, then for sure he would be in Azkaban. The problem is, that we don't know what the Dark Arts really are. Are they just the Unforgivable Curses? Or is it just delving into dangerous magic? Anyway, there's nothing to suggest that teenage Snape was killing people left and right. In fact, canon contradicts this. Kim now: I don't think Valky was referring to "he" Snape, but to "he" Voldemort. So starting with that clarification (and maybe Valky has already made the same clarification by the time I post this and stick my nose in where it perhaps doesn't belong...), maybe Valky's post should be re-read... Hickengreundler continued: Snape told Dumbledore, that Sirius proved himself to be able to commit murder at the age of sixteen. If Snape did so, too, and for some inexcusable reason weren't sent to Azkaban, then surely Dumbledore would have reminded him of that. And even if he did, then the Marauders couldn't have known about that, because they would have told Harry (at least Sirius would, for sure). We did saw him killing flies, but then, I'm sure we all have already killed a fly. And at least one of the so-called childish pranks from Sirius could very well have killed Snape. How do we know that Sirius didn't attempt murder here? Maybe Snape's suspicion was right. And it's not that Sirius ever felt sorry for this. [signed] Hickengruendler, who really thinks, that if the storyline weren't told from Harry's point of view but from a more objective one, Sirius would look as bad as Snape. A nasty, prejudiced and dangerous man (with a sad life, that makes his behaviour understandable), who nonetheless decided to fight for the good site. It's just Harry's rose-coloured point of view, that makes look Sirius better Kim adds: I don't think the story is actually being told from Harry's point of view, in which case it would be written in the first person (the way the novel Lolita or The remains of the day are, for example). Although even then, since it's fiction, it would still be JKR's point of view... Nevertheless, it seems clear what Hickengreundler's point of view is and we're all entitled to our own point of view after all, no matter how wrong we may be.... ;-) Kim (who hopes her point of view doesn't suggest that she doesn't agree with Hickengreundler's point of view of Snape and Sirius, because she mostly does) From mommystery at hotmail.com Sat Nov 27 01:04:21 2004 From: mommystery at hotmail.com (mommystery2003) Date: Sat, 27 Nov 2004 01:04:21 -0000 Subject: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118648 > Then Carol signed off: > Carol, requesting that posters be a bit more careful in their > snipping and attributions > > Kim now: > I agree with Carol's sign-off completely too. :-) > > Kim Kim, I explained to Carol in another post of mine that I was thinking more on my response at the time, then who wrote what I was quoting. I apologize to both of you, none of it was done with any ill intent and beg forgiveness from you both! This quote from you: What the bully doesn't say outloud (usually) is what about that person's "existence" makes the bully want to attack him (or her). That makes a lot of sense seeing it from the perspective of James. Honestly, I wonder just how much those two (James and Sirius) got away with during their school years! Because Dumbledore does seem to give a lot of leeway to Harry and friends...was that the same leeway James and friends received too? To the detriment of Snape? From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Sat Nov 27 01:16:58 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Sat, 27 Nov 2004 01:16:58 -0000 Subject: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118649 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "mommystery2003" wrote: Honestly, I wonder just how much those two (James and Sirius) got away with during their school years! Because Dumbledore does seem to give a lot of leeway to Harry and friends...was that the same leeway James and friends received too? To the detriment of Snape?. Alla: I am REALLY hesitant to apply any generational parralels after OOP. But OK, I don't really think that Marauders got away with much in their school years. If we are talking about Prank, then again, we don't know whether Sirius was punished or not, the only knowledge we have is that he was not expelled. Well, could it be that Dumbledore considered some mitigating circumstances present in the case?" Who knows, maybe Sirius was sent to Forbidden forest every day for the detention? The "My memory is as good as ever" was brought up today. Interesting how Dumbledore does not answer Snape's "you remember that Sirius Black was capable of murder at the age of 16" (sorry, I lost the page number, so I may have misquoted) with "Yes, I remember that" He is replying with that criptic line " My memory is as good as ever". It could mean anything. It can mean for example that Snape got away with a lot of things in their school years and THAT is what Dumbledore remembers. Maybe THAT is what partially sent him on DE path- Dumbledore's feeling sorry for him and not being stern enough. From ginnysthe1 at yahoo.com Sat Nov 27 02:24:46 2004 From: ginnysthe1 at yahoo.com (ginnysthe1) Date: Sat, 27 Nov 2004 02:24:46 -0000 Subject: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118650 Hi, Mommystery (or Ces?): You wrote: I explained to Carol in another post of mine that I was thinking more on my response at the time, then who wrote what I was quoting. I apologize to both of you, none of it was done with any ill intent and beg forgiveness from you both! Kim now: No need to apologize to me really, though thanks! I didn't think you meant any harm, and I have the possible fault of trying to find a way to be clever when I write, so I needn't have pushed the point that Carol had already made. Anyway my job probably gives me lots more practice at checking and re-checking the typed word, so I may have a little advantage on that front as a result. Quote from Kim: What the bully doesn't say out loud (usually) is what about that person's "existence" makes the bully want to attack him (or her). Mommystery replied: That makes a lot of sense seeing it from the perspective of James. Honestly, I wonder just how much those two (James and Sirius) got away with during their school years! Because Dumbledore does seem to give a lot of leeway to Harry and friends...was that the same leeway James and friends received too? To the detriment of Snape? Kim now: That's a good question! I don't remember from reading the books if it was ever mentioned who the headmaster was when James and Sirius were students. Must have been Dumbledore for at least part of or the whole time though. I agree that DD is definitely partial to Harry and friends (well, emotionally-partial at least), but I still think they get penalized (points taken, detentions, etc.) when necessary. But there seem to have been changes over the years as to what's considered unacceptable behavior from students (as well as teachers), so maybe not only James and Sirius, but other students during their time got away with more than the students of Harry's day. However I think many on this list have agreed that there's a lot of cruel and hazardous behavior that passes for "normal" at Hogwarts and in the WW in general, so maybe we "Muggle" readers have a slanted view on things. Cheers, Kim From mommystery at hotmail.com Sat Nov 27 02:56:09 2004 From: mommystery at hotmail.com (mommystery2003) Date: Sat, 27 Nov 2004 02:56:09 -0000 Subject: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118651 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "ginnysthe1" wrote: However I > think many on this list have agreed that there's a lot of cruel and > hazardous behavior that passes for "normal" at Hogwarts and in the WW > in general, so maybe we "Muggle" readers have a slanted view on > things. Hi Kim, And it's Ces! I'm still fairly new at posting here, so you'll probably find a few more mistakes from me! I agree with you about what passes for "normal" at Hogwarts! I think we must have a slanted view on things. I do hope we get to find out eventually what (if any) punishment Black got for what he did to Snape, but I wonder if we will. After Harry went to Remus and Sirius for answers about what he saw in the pensieve, that was the time for those two to speak up and admit that what happened was wrong. I think it's past time for Harry to find out his father was not perfect and that Snape isn't to blame for everything that happened. That was the time for a long talk with Harry about both his parents and the actions of all the Marauders during their time at school. I still have a feeling, deep down inside me, that while James and Sirius professed to hate the dark arts, that didn't stop them from having some sort of contact with Voldemort after school - sort of black marketeers. I'm probably totally off base, but it's my gut feeling. Ces From doddiemoemoe at yahoo.com Sat Nov 27 05:10:45 2004 From: doddiemoemoe at yahoo.com (doddiemoemoe) Date: Sat, 27 Nov 2004 05:10:45 -0000 Subject: Spy novel? maybe (was Lupin's secrets ) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118652 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Sharon" wrote: > > Kneasy: > > But another question occurs - are things being kept from Harry (and > > therefore us) because of plot requirements - in other words because > > it's *essential* that Harry not have the information before the > denoument > > - or has JKR set it up this way just to keep the readers guessing? > > Oh, totally. Remember she did say that there was a story thread that > was taken out of CoS entirely because it gave away too much > information too soon. She's definitely keeping stuff back from us, > as well as from Harry. It's just a matter of what that information > is...ESE Lupin? Dumbledore's Spy Peter? Who knows? > > Part of me almost hopes she doesn't tell us for a long time. After > all, it took a bit of the fun out of it when we learned that Blaise > really is a boy. > > --azriona The one thing I loathe about story lines removed etc...is that was it the editors final word...or J.K. Rowling's? In the end it would be jk who agreed to a movie script..but the books thus far?????.... Did she agree because she listened to a "marketing ploy"....or because drama is drama, and not a mystery... (hence many portions of septology could be edited as a "spy novel" with all the drama in tact)! Let's face it...most editors work for a publisher who wants to SELL books. I would not normally think this would apply...but JK seemed to have fewer problems with editors getting to publication after her second best seller(CS)... And now...there seems to be so much story involved that the editors would check for incongruincies in "facts thus far" rather than "fixing a story line that will sell"...**shrug** If I'm wrong..Who cares!?!?!??? If I'm right..it may explain the length in some of the novels(POA, GOF).. All I know is that spy, or otherwise..they are all good novels; and the story...is a great one..who we all hope to be epic! Doddiemoe... (who wishes she was even an editor of the book titles..or chapter titles...or even a punctuation corrector on any of the books!) From azriona at juno.com Sat Nov 27 07:52:35 2004 From: azriona at juno.com (Sharon) Date: Sat, 27 Nov 2004 07:52:35 -0000 Subject: Spy novel? maybe (was Lupin's secrets ) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118653 Doddiemoe: > The one thing I loathe about story lines removed etc...is that was > it the editors final word...or J.K. Rowling's? > I believe it was JKR's choice. At least, she seems to put the decision all on herself, at a point at which the editors had likely not seen the final story yet. Doddiemoe: > Let's face it...most editors work for a publisher who wants to SELL > books. I would not normally think this would apply...but JK seemed > to have fewer problems with editors getting to publication after her > second best seller(CS)... I think that's just because she's been successful. The publishers *know* her books are going to sell - much like Stephen King or Danielle Steel or Tom Clancy. At a certain point, it's not the quality of the book that will sell it but the name of the person who writes it. (This is why Madonna's daughter can write a book and get it published without any problems whatsoever.) > Doddiemoe: > And now...there seems to be so much story involved that the editors > would check for incongruincies in "facts thus far" rather > than "fixing a story line that will sell"...**shrug** > Probably because like George Lucas, JKR is keeping the overall storyline close to home. I wonder if her editors know how it will all turn out? Admit it - it'd be real hard to edit those books when you don't know if a certain detail - such as Mark Evans - is suddenly going to be huge come Book 7. --az From kjones at telus.net Sat Nov 27 02:53:21 2004 From: kjones at telus.net (Kathryn Jones) Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2004 18:53:21 -0800 Subject: What has Snape seen (Was Re: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <41A7EC21.4020503@telus.net> No: HPFGUIDX 118654 Magda: > Interesting that she says "he will have SEEN things that..." > not "he will have DONE things that..." > Assistant-to-Voldemort's-Potion-Master!Snape sounds quite likely. Nora: > True. But that means *minimum* of aiding-and-abetting. > I find it hard to reconcile a Snape who didn't actually have to do > anything but make potions with the example (admittedly spotty) of > Regulus Black, who panicked at the demands and got killed. Neri: > Actually, JKR saying here "he will have SEEN" doesn't imply at all > that our dear Severus hasn't DONE anything. The reason JKR > said "seen" was that she was answering the question "can Snape see > thestrals?" IWO she was referring to the question if he has SEEN > death. Kathy Writes: I would assume that it would be unlikely for students to be marked as full DE's due to the lack of privacy. I would also tend to assume, considering the general dumbness of most of the other deatheaters that Snape was a relatively good score for Voldemort and he would have treated Snape decently at first. It would not be out of the question for V to possibly arrange an aprrenticeship for Snape to become a Master of Potions in order to provide whatever substances V. required for his imortality, and whatever research might be required. In this scenario, Snape might have joined the DE's shortly after graduation, and served his apprenticeship requirements. Once this had been completed, he would then have been expected to take his place among the DE's, which would be just about the time he went to Dumbledore. It could be that the first few requirements of V's was more than he could stomach. As a spy, at that time, as Dumbledore stated, he would have been expected to participate or perhaps produce potion requirements and still maintain his cover. It certainly takes up the 5-6 year time span between graduation and V's fall. KJ From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com Sat Nov 27 09:16:18 2004 From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (Barry Arrowsmith) Date: Sat, 27 Nov 2004 09:16:18 +0000 Subject: When? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118655 Interesting spread of ideas amongst the responses, with Veelas leading the pack. I can understand why some would make this choice, which of course is a lead-up to me saying that I'll stiil look for other explanations. The Veelas certainly have a compulsive effect, no doubt about it, but would the organisers of the QWC allow massed Unforgivable curses to be thrown around? I suspect that Veelas are another mythological reference that JKR has slipped into her books, this time from Ulysses - Sirens. Half woman, half bird, singing songs so sweet that the hearer was entranced and forgot everything else, eventually dying of hunger. Ulysses wants to hear the siren's song, so he tied himself to the mast. His oarsmen had their ears stopped up with wax and were unaffected. And when the Veelas get annoyed: "their faces were elongating into sharp, cruel-beaked bird heads, and long, scaly wings were bursting from their shoulders." Plus their influence can be negated by stuffing your fingers in your ears - as Arthur tells the boys to do at one point and as the medi-wizard does when giving the referee a kick. So, I may be wrong but I've got a reasonable excuse for differing. I really hope that this missing Imperio! isn't another little wrinkle somewhere in the murky obscurity of GH and the missing 24 hours. Oh, dear. That'd be verging on the unfair IMO. One miniscule hint and then presenting it as a key part of the eventual explication is liable to cause mutterings from the back of the audience. Time to scour the canon - again. Are there any passages were it looks as if Harry's behaviour is not what one would expect given the circumstances? And where this is repeated so it could be considered a trend? Can't think of any off-hand. It can be hard work being a fan. Kneasy From hannahmarder at yahoo.co.uk Sat Nov 27 17:26:21 2004 From: hannahmarder at yahoo.co.uk (Hannah) Date: Sat, 27 Nov 2004 17:26:21 -0000 Subject: When? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118656 Kneasy wrote: > So, I may be wrong but I've got a reasonable excuse for differing. > > I really hope that this missing Imperio! isn't another little wrinkle > somewhere in the murky obscurity of GH and the missing 24 hours. Oh, > dear. That'd be verging on the unfair IMO. One miniscule hint and then > presenting it as a key part of the eventual explication is liable to > cause mutterings from the back of the audience. > > Time to scour the canon - again. Are there any passages were it looks > as if Harry's behaviour is not what one would expect given the > circumstances? And where this is repeated so it could be considered a > trend? Can't think of any off-hand. Hannah: The problem I have with the idea that maybe Harry's been imperio'd at some other time without knowing it, is that the narrative is from Harry's point of view. If Harry didn't know he'd been imperio'd (and I'm sure we'd have heard about it if he did), then I don't think the narrator would either. Also, if Harry had felt that mind-numbing sensation at any point during canon, it would have said as much, I think. There's only one point in canon that I can think of when Harry may have been acting under imperio/ imperio-like process, that hasn't already been posted, and that's at the end of PS/SS, when QuirrelMort asks him to 'come here' and Harry obeys. This may be movie contamination, as in the film it makes it look as if he walks over against his will. In the book it doesn't say either way. But I suppose it is a possibility? It also depends on the interpretation. With the veela thing, I don't think anyone's sugggesting that they are actually using 'imperio,' just that their presence naturally exerts a similar effect, at least on men. Does JKR mean he's felt that specific spell's effect on three occasions, or is she referring to the mind- numbing feeling in general? Or is she just having trouble with her maths again? Although the conspiracy therorist in me hates to admit it, I think the 'three times' must be a FLINT. Hannah From hannahmarder at yahoo.co.uk Sat Nov 27 18:42:29 2004 From: hannahmarder at yahoo.co.uk (Hannah) Date: Sat, 27 Nov 2004 18:42:29 -0000 Subject: What has Snape seen (Was Re: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs) In-Reply-To: <41A7EC21.4020503@telus.net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118657 > Magda: > > Interesting that she says "he will have SEEN things that..." > > not "he will have DONE things that..." > > Assistant-to-Voldemort's-Potion-Master!Snape sounds quite likely. > > Kathy Wrote: > I would assume that it would be unlikely for students to be > marked as full DE's due to the lack of privacy. I would also tend to > assume, considering the general dumbness of most of the other > deatheaters that Snape was a relatively good score for Voldemort and he > would have treated Snape decently at first. It would not be out of the > question for V to possibly arrange an aprrenticeship for Snape to > become a Master of Potions in order to provide whatever substances V. > required for his imortality, and whatever research might be required. In this scenario, Snape might have joined the DE's shortly after > graduation, and served his apprenticeship requirements. Once this had been completed, he would then have been expected to take his place among the DE's, which would be just about the time he went to Dumbledore. It could be that the first few requirements of V's was more than he could > stomach. As a spy, at that time, as Dumbledore stated, he would have been expected to participate or perhaps produce potion requirements and > still maintain his cover. It certainly takes up the 5-6 year time span between graduation and V's fall. Hannah: In some interpretations of the timeline, that gap is as short as 4 years. That's not that long for Snape to join the DE's, be one for a while, change his mind, switch sides, and spy of a bit. I also agree that Snape would have been quite a good catch for LV. So I think he joined up shortly after graduation, maybe late that summer or the following autumn. Also, his friends (Lucius, Bella, Rodolphus) that were in his 'gang' would probably already have been in by then, and keen for little Sevvie to join them. Snape must have had some sort of 'respectable' job as well as being a DE. He hadn't been accused of being a DE before LV fell (or Sirius would have known), so presumably he had some sort of cover. Maybe he worked for a potions making company, or at St. Mungo's (they must have in house potions makers). As to what he's seen or done, in some ways I hope he's not done anything too awful, but OTOH I think it would be a bit lame if it turns out he just hid away at HQ with his nose in a cauldron the whole time. I reckon he'll have seen a lot of nasty things, and done at least a few himself. For instance, I can see him managing the Cruiciatius curse without too much difficulty, if it was on the 'right' person. Not sending Snape out to fight would be wasting a valuable resource for LV, IMO. All the signs point to him being pretty handy in a duel, especially where he'd have the upper hand to start with. There's the quick reactions, the ability to keep his cool (at least in certain situations), his mastery of plenty of hexes... No, he'd have been there at various muggle killings and Order fights, maybe as Lucius' right hand man. Even once he'd turned spy he'd still have had to participate when required in order to maintain his cover. Hannah From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com Sat Nov 27 20:22:09 2004 From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (arrowsmithbt) Date: Sat, 27 Nov 2004 20:22:09 -0000 Subject: Good news - announcement Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118658 On Mugglenet:- Release date for HPB will be announced on JKR's site in January. If sequence is as previously, title is announced 1 year in advance, release date 6 months in advance. Which would make it a June release. Bet it's at the end of the month so that any schoolkid fans can get their exams finished). Kneasy From willsonkmom at msn.com Sat Nov 27 21:09:02 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Sat, 27 Nov 2004 21:09:02 -0000 Subject: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118659 > > Valky: > Indeed, I have been misunderstood. I expected this because it is > really hard to specify that I am speaking strictly about the first > part of the incident. Starting at James saying "All right Snivellus > and ending with the words expecting an attack. > > This miniscule passage has been continually construed to prove that > James wand was drawn before Severus reached for his., but it doesn't > support this belief, at all. > The first line clearly shows Harry was looking at James and only > observed him speaking, the second line questions Severus' action of > reaching for his wand, that adds up to James was not armed. > > In the passages following this James and Sirius are obviously > bullying Snape, yes bullying. Disgusting , snot-faced, self- > righteous and reprehensible behaviour. Angry readers want to believe > further to this that James was too weak to disarm his opponent in a > fair wand draw, but he wasn't. It's just overkill on the James is a > rotten tomato march, it's a step too far, and I simply pointed out > that it's not even a necessary one. James and Sirius behaved badly > enough in what they did do. Label away angry Snape lovers, but stick > to the truth, is all I am saying. Potioncat: Here is where you and I are misunderstanding each other. Neither of us know when James drew his wand. Agreed? I honestly do not have an opinin, based on canon on whether his wand was in his hand when he called to "Snivelus." What canon does tell us is that he stood up, he cued Sirius. It doesn't matter if he is holding the wand or not, he is prepared and he calls out in a threatening way to Severus. Or if not threatening, hostile. So I do not blame Severus for pulling his wand. I don't even really blame James for expelliarmus. But that it continues shows me that James intended something like this, and that he used his advantage and in my opinion, he has attacked an unexecting person. So, I don't think holding the wand would make him any worse than he already was. Nor do we know when he pulled his wand. As far as sticking to the truth goes, you can no more truthfully say that James was not holding his wand, than anyone else could say he was holding it. We do not know. > Valky: > I have had this discussion before potioncat. Have you checked your > HP time;line, lately? > Why? In the time of the reign of Voldemort, when a mad "DARK ARTS" > wizard is killing anyone and any innocent thing he comes across, > this is the time we are referring to. > How can you possibly question whether the Dark Arts are worse than > childish pranks. > He is killing people, potioncat. It's like asking a semite if they'd > rather a brown coat in their house or a frog in their bed. > Your question is ridiculous. > Sorry, potioncat I am getting a bit personal there. I don't mean to > bite, it's just a pretty significant point to me. > > Valky hoping potioncat won't hate me after this. Potioncat: Severus knew more dark arts than "most 7th years" when he arrived at Hogwarts. It appears normal for 7th years to know dark arts...not wrong, not illegal...normal. It is wrong to drink alcohol and drive. I drink alcohol. That does not make me a drunk driver. We do not know that Severus at 15 was a DE. If James knew, he should have reported him. I can tell many more posts have followed this one, although at the moment only 2 show up directly on the thread. So I'm responding to your questions at this point. And now I'll go read the many continuing discussion points that are showing up on the list. From willsonkmom at msn.com Sat Nov 27 21:15:23 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Sat, 27 Nov 2004 21:15:23 -0000 Subject: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118660 > Valky: > Sorry to be a stick in the mud, but wasn't he struggling to reach > his wand? Potioncat: I've cut and pasted from up thread: Potioncat: > As to a fair fight: > James drops Severus to the ground, Severus jumps up with his wand > ready and James throws a locomotor mortis. At Lily's command, James > counters it and Snape stands up. Nothing is said about his wand. > Lily tells James off making him mad and walks off and at that point, > James jerks Severus back into the air and offers to take off his > pants.Either Severus had his wand, but did not cast a curse while > James and Lily were arguing, then James threw one without warning. > (Was Severus the one fighting fair?) > > This is after the stuggle. After Lily insists they stop. We are not told whether Severus has his wand. We are not told if Sirius has a wand pointed at him. We are not told the wand is on the ground. We just don't know. So maybe he is under "restraint" and has no choice, or maybe he does. I'll agree that I don't know if he is playing fair here, but I state it is a possibility. From bob.oliver at cox.net Sat Nov 27 17:56:11 2004 From: bob.oliver at cox.net (lupinlore) Date: Sat, 27 Nov 2004 17:56:11 -0000 Subject: Too "Good" Harry / The resolution of Snape In-Reply-To: <20041124205241.11541.qmail@web53105.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118661 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Magda Grantwich wrote: > > Well, for reasons I personally don't understand, JKR seems to think > the Trio are much more interesting than the adult characters. Weird, > but there you go. So I'm afraid that most of the adult characters > are expendable as far as she's concerned, and that includes Snape. > Yes, that is one of the questions we argue about, isn't it? Chuckle. It does seem to constitute a basic divide among readers, this question of the adults. I have to admit, I am of the opposite inclination, and really don't see why people find the adults so fascinating. I mean, we have, (IMO of course): 1) An emotionally crippled, semi-hysterical neurotic who seems to be an adequate spy but other than that is rather a boring and uninteresting Johnny One-Note with a penchant for acting the fool; 2) a passive-aggressive werewolf with a severe inferiority complex; 3) a teacher who, despite supposed decades of experience, seems totally incapable of dealing with the most understandable of behavior from adolescent boys, much less of communicating adequately with said adolescents, and finally; 4) a headmaster who, despite supposedly being the most powerful wizard in the world, lurches from one spectacular failure and misjudgment to another I mean they really are a bunch of pathetic magical morons (chuckle, IMO of course). At the end of OOTP, when the order threatened the Dursleys, I was waiting for Harry to say, "Gee, thanks idiots. You're only about fifteen years too late. Now, why don't you really impress me and take care of your own Voldemort problems?" Lupinlore From bob.oliver at cox.net Sat Nov 27 18:16:47 2004 From: bob.oliver at cox.net (lupinlore) Date: Sat, 27 Nov 2004 18:16:47 -0000 Subject: Pampering (was Re:Harry at the Dursleys) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118662 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "delwynmarch" wrote: > > And then, things changed in OoP. The Dursleys suddenly seemed to > become real people, Dementors haunt the neighbourhood, Harry starts > bullying Dudley, Uncle Vernon tries to strangle Harry and gets > shocked, and Aunt Petunia knows about the Dementors and receives a > Howler. Things aren't fun anymore. > > So of course now, we're forced to consider the Dursleys like real > people, and the way they treated Harry becomes very real abuse. It > doesn't make sense to me because, just like you Kjirstem, I never > really considered the Dursleys to be real people. But hey, it's JKR's > story, she can take it wherever she wants. We readers are not forced > to follow all the way, though. For now, I'm still happier with > Parody!Dursleys. > I think herein lies the heart of the problem with OOTP, and much of the problem with the "turn" of the series in OOTP. I suspect that JKR wants to go "only so far, no farther" with the darkness and realism. That is, we are supposed to accept certain things without accepting their implications. The problem is, you can't have it both ways. That's akin to throwing someone out a window and yelling at them to stop halfway to the ground. Thus we are supposed to accept the Dursleys as "real" but not accept the implication that their "real" behavior constitutes abuse. We are supposed to accept Dumbledore as a real person who made a real decision with real knowledge but we aren't supposed to accept the implication that he is therefore party to said abuse. But that just doesn't work, because you can't have it both ways. If the Dursleys are supposed to be "real" as opposed to over the top parodies then they are child abusers. And if Dumbledore is "real" in that context he is party to child abuse. What is acceptable and uncontroversial behavior in a fairy tale is not acceptable and uncontroversial behavior in a story that aims to be "real." Lupinlore From jlnbtr at yahoo.com Sat Nov 27 21:45:07 2004 From: jlnbtr at yahoo.com (Juli) Date: Sat, 27 Nov 2004 13:45:07 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041127214507.53886.qmail@web53109.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 118663 Hi everyone, This past week I've read a LOT of posts abouth bullies and I've never found a place to put my own point of view so here it goes. At the beginning of the scene James is playing with the snitch, Remus is reading, Sirius is just laying on the grass and Peter is worshiping James, then as Sirius comments that he's bored, they get up and walk towards Severus. James reaches for his wand, Sirius makes some funny comment and then the duel starts, Snape seems to reach for his wand but James is faster. When I read this for the second or third time an idea came to my mind: this is a common scene, the Marauders and Snape attacked each other whenever they had the opportunity. I think in this scene James started the attack just like in many other occasions Severus did, I know I have no canon to support this, but by the way Sirius and Remus explained it at the fireplace this is how I get it. I believe the reason they hated each other was just that their personalities were completely different, Sirius and James were the cool kids at school, everyone liked them, they did good at school. Snape on the other hand was unpopular, not attractive, and he was into the Dark Arts. Snape wasn't exactly a weak kid, and AFAIK bullies just made fun of the weak kids because thay couldn't fight back, but Snape DID fight back. Juli From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Sat Nov 27 22:55:08 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Sat, 27 Nov 2004 22:55:08 -0000 Subject: Too "Good" Harry / The resolution of Snape In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118664 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "lupinlore" wrote: snip. Yes, that is one of the questions we argue about, isn't it? Chuckle. It does seem to constitute a basic divide among readers, this question of the adults. I have to admit, I am of the opposite inclination, and really don't see why people find the adults so fascinating. I mean, we have, (IMO of course): > > 1) An emotionally crippled, semi-hysterical neurotic who seems to be an adequate spy but other than that is rather a boring and uninteresting Johnny One-Note with a penchant for acting the fool; > > 2) a passive-aggressive werewolf with a severe inferiority complex; > > 3) a teacher who, despite supposed decades of experience, seems > totally incapable of dealing with the most understandable of > behavior from adolescent boys, much less of communicating adequately with said adolescents, and finally; > > 4) a headmaster who, despite supposedly being the most powerful > wizard in the world, lurches from one spectacular failure and > misjudgment to another > > I mean they really are a bunch of pathetic magical morons (chuckle, IMO of course). At the end of OOTP, when the order threatened the Dursleys, I was waiting for Harry to say, "Gee, thanks idiots. You're only about fifteen years too late. Now, why don't you really impress me and take care of your own Voldemort problems?" Alla: Oh, Lupinlore, I love your posts. :) That is surely unexpected and to some extent very agreeable look at at the adults of Potterverse. Really, those who expect the child to take on the most evil of evil Lords for them singlehandedly are bunch of morons. Now, why people love adults? I can only speak for myself and nobody else, of course. I love them BECAUSE they are adults and for what their characters could be and sometimes are in fanfiction, because we do see those glimpses in canon. All adults in Potterverse had been through hell - war, betrayal of trust, loss of friends and loved ones, unfair imprisoment. They SHOULD be much more complicated characters just because they saw more than children. To me it also includes emotional attachment to them, of course. Let's take Sirius for example - unfair imprisoment is something, which makes me sympathise with the character very strongly (besides his love for Harry, of course). I think it is partially because I come from the country, where during seventy eyars of soviet regime millions suffered unjustly in prisons and were killed only because they did not like the regime. See, I ,like Nora think, that from the point of literary analysis, Harry is objectively more complicated character than any of the adults, simply because we are in his head all the time and see different motivations for his behaviour. Harry is an exception for me, because he just like my favourite adults (Sirius, Lupina dn Snape) had been through hell too, that is why I am only happy that JKR develops him so well, but as to other kids.... Hmmm, I don't know. I think Ron is now well developed character. I am not even sure than I can say the same about Hermione. I cannot help but wish that the same was true for some adults too. Now, I also think that Snape's complexity is greatly exaggerated. We don't know his motivations, that is absolutely true, but I think that once we learn them, his motivations will be crystal clear for us. Now, maybe I carry a different definition of what does it mean to be complex character, so can someone give me one, please? Remus - well, yes. I want more Remus int he next two books, absolutely. By the way, I know I am being a bit slow, but who is number three in your description, if you don't mind? Alla From jlnbtr at yahoo.com Sat Nov 27 22:39:09 2004 From: jlnbtr at yahoo.com (Juli) Date: Sat, 27 Nov 2004 14:39:09 -0800 (PST) Subject: Too "Good" Harry / The resolution of Snape In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041127223909.67116.qmail@web53110.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 118665 lupinlore: > I mean they really are a bunch of pathetic magical > morons (chuckle, > IMO of course). At the end of OOTP, when the order > threatened the > Dursleys, I was waiting for Harry to say, "Gee, > thanks idiots. > You're only about fifteen years too late. Now, why > don't you really > impress me and take care of your own Voldemort > problems?" Juli: Great post Lupinlore, I LOL reading it, and I agree with you the adult characters are idiots, I mean I love them but they are completely clueless about everything, they have no idea what the kids think and what they are up to, they think it's better for the kids not to know, and still after 5 years they won't say a thing which at the end backfires at them. But I think it's sweet that the Order members went to the Dursleys and said that they'd better watch out, Harry has lost all his capability to scare the Dursleys, they know he can't do magic, Sirius is gone, so they were just trying to make things easier for Harry during the summer. Juli From sopraniste at yahoo.com Sun Nov 28 00:12:51 2004 From: sopraniste at yahoo.com (Maria Holub) Date: Sat, 27 Nov 2004 16:12:51 -0800 (PST) Subject: Veela (was: When?) In-Reply-To: <1101558947.2460.92068.m12@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <20041128001251.21604.qmail@web41207.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 118666 Kneasy said: I suspect that Veelas are another mythological reference that JKR has slipped into her books, this time from Ulysses - Sirens. Now, I agree that this is one possibility (you'll forgive me for snipping your support; consider it point taken) but I wanted to air my theory on the Veela. I had assumed them to be related to the Willis (or, in German: Vilja) who IIRC figure in Germanic mythology somewhere. I'm most familiar with them from the second act of the ballet Giselle. Basically, they take revenge on men who jilt their ladies by DANCING them to death! Flop __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? All your favorites on one personal page Try My Yahoo! http://my.yahoo.com From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sun Nov 28 01:44:35 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2004 01:44:35 -0000 Subject: Spy novel? maybe (was Lupin's secrets ) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118667 Kneasy wrote: > The motivations matter, I think. Jo hints as much by saying that almost nobody is born evil. The opportunity to become evil is one > thing, it's an opportunity open to everyone, but if they're not born evil, how do they become evil? What drives them to it? What is their > motivation? Power say some. Fine; probably is in some instances, > but it's not unknown for people to choose sides not through > general principles, but because of where friends or personal enemies > stand. Carol responds: I think you're on the right track here. I would go even farther and say that JKR thinks that *no one*, including Voldermort, is born evil (or at least, no human being is born evil). The idea that any child could be born evil contradicts the persistent theme that it's our choices, not our talents, that determine who we are. Voldemort and Bellatrix and Barty Jr., to name three of the most obviously evil characters, are as much the products of their choices as Dumbledore is of his. Regarding your statement that people sometimes choose sides not so much on principle as because their friends or personal enemies have chosen a particular side, I would not be surprised if this idea was one of the reasons why the young Snape joined the Death Eaters. After three years or so on his own without his Slytherin gang, he must have felt an intense desire not only to rejoin his seemingly like-minded friends but also to oppose whichever side James Potter and Sirius Black had chosen. And that would, of course, have been the opposite side to the former Slytherins. Dumbledore's statement that Snape *rejoined* the good side before Godric's Hollow suggests to me that Dumbledore had considerable influence over Severus during his Hogwarts years. (We know, for example, that he didn't reveal for a very long time that Lupin was a werewolf. Cf. als the question of what happened to Snape's *first* chance.) During those last school years, DD must at least have had some hope that Severus would ultimately choose his side over that of the former Slytherins who had already joined LV. Later, when Snape for whatever reason decided to leave the DEs, it appears that he *returned* to Dumbledore, leaving his so-called friends or rather spying on them at Dumbledore's behest. Principle (the pureblood ethic) may have played a part in his joining the DEs. Most likely principles of a higher sort led to his leaving despite the danger to himself and the lost chance for advancement which I think was his primary motivation for joining the DEs in the first place. Even so, I think the chance to be with his friends again must have been sorely tempting after the ordeal of his last few years at Hogwarts and probably was one important component of his choice to join the DEs. Carol, just speculating here, but hoping that others will see some basis for these ideas From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sun Nov 28 02:42:14 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2004 02:42:14 -0000 Subject: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118668 Nora wrote: > > Perhaps because I tend to take them seriously, I can envision an > (idiotically going about it, in part because of deep fears) > Vigilante!James, in school. The Dark Arts seem to be what divides > pureblood families like the Potters, who don't seem to have the > blood ideas held up high, from families like the Malfoys and Blacks, > who do. Given our scanty evidence, there's still a fairly strong > association between the Dark Arts, pureblood ideology, and becoming > a DE. I can see James' behavior towards a young Severus he suspects > of being into the Dark Arts as a boneheaded vigilante response, > because I think those currents were probably strong back then, the > conflicts between those who were supporters of ideology Voldemort > promulgated and those who weren't--the time just before everything > really exploded into the open. Unless it was already exploding and > we just don't quite know about that either. > > Mind you, that's no excuse for such nasty behavior on James' part. > But fear does unpleasant things to human beings, and I think there > is fear involved: "Those people into the Dark Arts, look what > they're doing/going to do to the rest of us--teach them a lesson > now!". "Fear is the matrix of vice", says one of my favorite > authors. It's worth thinking about it as a motivation. Carol responds: I don't see any evidence of fear, or of loathing of the Dark Arts, in James at fifteen (echoes of an old TV series in my mind here). He seems to be in this poor excuse for a duel solely for its supposed entertainment value. Sirius is bored; James sees Severus, whom they both dislike, and decides to show off. To me it seems clear that this is a different James from the one who later joins the Order. He is not yet taking the Dark Arts and Voldemort seriously. He doesn't have Sirius's exposure to the Dark Arts and doesn't *yet* have a personal reason for opposing them. His parents are still alive; Sirius has not yet moved in with the Potters. (That happened when he was sixteen, probably during the summer following the Pensieve incident, but just possibly the summer after that, depending when his birthday falls.) I don't think that James would have acted as he did in this incident if his parents had already been murdered by Voldemort, which they must have been to disappear together between James's last years at Hogwarts and Godric's Hollow. He would have been much more sanctimonious, much more serious, openly acting as the champion of the Light against the supposed practitioner of the Dark Arts, Severus Snape. I see nothing of that pseudoheroic savior-of-the-world attitude in this incident. James has been laughing and joking and playing with a snitch. He remains in show-off mode throughout the incident. Moreover, I'm not sure that he would have rescued Severus from the werewolf the following year if he had seen him as a real and dangerous disciple of evil. Unless, of course, it was really Remus and Sirius whom he was saving. At any rate, I think the James that Lily falls in love with had a good reason to change, more than her disapproveal of his hexing people who annoyed him. He may, at that point, have begun to act on principle, ro realize the danger that Voldemort posed because he had personally experienced the pain of loss. And he *may* have transferred that new feeling onto his ongoing feud with Severus, perhaps unwittingly pushing Severus toward the Dark Side in doing so. But to see the Pensieve incident as a principled battle of Light against Dark is to distort arrogance into rectitude. I'll grant that *Sirius* at this point opposed the Dark Arts, but his motive was personal and his attitude toward Severus can only be called vindictive. There is, as far as I can see, nothing noble in the motivation of either boy at this point. If you can present evidence of fear and loathing of the Dark Arts on James's part at this point, other than Sirius's after the fact attribution of that hatred to him, I will reconsider this position. But even if James did hate the Dark Arts, his treatment of Severus in this scene is inexcusable bullying. Carol, who hopes she's not beating the same horse to death and will try to avoid this thread for awhile just in case From nrenka at yahoo.com Sun Nov 28 02:46:25 2004 From: nrenka at yahoo.com (nrenka) Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2004 02:46:25 -0000 Subject: Spy novel? maybe (was Lupin's secrets ) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118669 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" wrote: > Carol responds: > I think you're on the right track here. I would go even farther and > say that JKR thinks that *no one*, including Voldermort, is born > evil (or at least, no human being is born evil). The idea that any > child could be born evil contradicts the persistent theme that it's > our choices, not our talents, that determine who we are. A short post to address one issue, because this is not quite what Dumbledore actually says--if we're taking that as our basis for argument. It's pretty frequently misquoted. Dumbledore says, near the end of CoS, "It is our choices that show what we truly are, far more than our abilities." Show. Not determine. Which is not to wholly invalidate the point made above and the subject being discussed, but to point out that, perhaps, JKR's cosmology is a little more essentialist than one might like. Showing what we are speaks to there being something there that we actually *are*, deep down inside (an essence, if you will), and that this fundamental aspect of our being is revealed more through our choices than our abilities. The focus here on revelation rather than self- shaping seems to point to there being something fixed within people-- which, like it or not, seems to fit with her statements that Tom Riddle never loved anyone. -Nora is more of an existential type herself, but isn't going to try to fight the prevailing cosmology of a series in analysis From nrenka at yahoo.com Sun Nov 28 02:58:35 2004 From: nrenka at yahoo.com (nrenka) Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2004 02:58:35 -0000 Subject: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118670 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" wrote: > Carol responds: > I don't see any evidence of fear, or of loathing of the Dark Arts, > in James at fifteen (echoes of an old TV series in my mind here). He > seems to be in this poor excuse for a duel solely for its supposed > entertainment value. Sirius is bored; James sees Severus, whom they > both dislike, and decides to show off. I see fear as a covert motivator here, possibly. That's what I was trying to get at with the Shklar quote, way down there. There's often a subconscious fear of something motivating an aggressive attitude towards it. Good people do bad things under the influence of fear, be it obvious or not. No, there's no evidence that he has the personal experience with the Dark Arts that Sirius does. That was, however, my entire point of bringing up (perhaps downthread?) the point that *everyone* has an ideology. The Potters seem to have been something of a prominent, established family--JKR has told us James inherited the money, and didn't have to work. He also clearly disapproves of Lily being called a Mudblood--that's what provokes the furtherance of the bullying. This points to a James who was raised in a pureblood family that had no truck with the Dark Arts, and was probably never too associated with Slytherin House, either. It doesn't have to be deeply personal to be something strongly ingrained in someone's ideology and personal beliefs. James doesn't *have* to have his parents brutally murdered to still have been brought up to hate the Dark Arts and everything they stand for. Now, the hypothesized death of the parents may well have been a great turning point in his life, but there's nothing to rule out there already being a strong anti-Dark Arts ideological foundation there. I'm just trying to postulate some deeper undercurrents that might have been interacting with James' adolescent idiocy, because these things were most likely going on at that point in time. Voldemort is a name that's being bandied around, and there are obviously currents of anti-Muggleborn sentiment, as well. We are equally somewhat hung out to dry on the category of cold hard evidence, because you can't establish seriation and patterns that would make things more coherent from one incident, either. And we're ruling out second-hand reports from other characters, if you're ruling out Sirius' claim that James *always* hated the Dark Arts. -Nora notes that it's always fair game to try to flesh out motivations for all characters involved From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Sun Nov 28 02:59:09 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2004 02:59:09 -0000 Subject: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118671 Carol: If you can present evidence of fear and loathing of the Dark Arts on James's part at this point, other than Sirius's after the fact attribution of that hatred to him,I will reconsider this position. Alla: I think the HINT of James already hating Dark Arts and especially pureblood ideology IS there, namely his reaction to Snape calling Lily a "Mudblood" "What?" yelped James. "I'd NEVER call you a - you- know what!" - OOP, p.648. Carol: But even if James did hate the Dark Arts, his treatment of Severus in this scene is inexcusable bullying. Alla: True, but I see no reason to exclude his hate of DA as ONE of the reasons for such bullying. From pcsgames at toltbbs.com Sun Nov 28 03:00:21 2004 From: pcsgames at toltbbs.com (Phil Vlasak) Date: Sat, 27 Nov 2004 22:00:21 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Good news - announcement In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <6.2.0.14.0.20041127215436.02a15508@mail.toltbbs.com> No: HPFGUIDX 118672 Kneasy wrote: >Release date for HPB will be announced on >JKR's site in January. > >If sequence is as previously, title is announced 1 year >in advance, release date 6 months in advance. Which >would make it a June release. > >Bet it's at the end of the month so that any schoolkid >fans can get their exams finished). > >Kneasy Now Phil: If I have the published dates correct: Philosopher's Stone 30 June 1997. Chamber of Secrets, 2 July 1998. Prisoner of Azkaban 8 July 1999. Goblet of Fire, 8 July 2000. Order of the Phoenix 21 June 2003. Then, Half-Blood Prince will be published between June 21 and July 8 Phil [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From willsonkmom at msn.com Sun Nov 28 03:01:59 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2004 03:01:59 -0000 Subject: dark magic was Re: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118673 Kneasy wrote: > I also wonder just how much Snapey knew aged 11; I'd be surprised > if Sirius didn't know almost as much. We know that the Black family > was pretty nasty, we assume the Snape family was too. Add the fact > that wizard kids seem to get their wands just before entering Hogwarts > and they could both have picked up a fair amount of theory but probably > not much practice. Potioncat: And I'd be surprised if Sirius didn't point out how much Dark Arts Severus knew, to draw attention away from the amount Sirius knew. We've talked about learning magic at home from many different directions. But it would be easy enough for a parent who really wanted to, to teach some things at home. The kid wouldn't even need his own wand, you know. He could use a hand-me-down. The issue is, did JKR intend that. I think we all forget sometime that the real back story only exists in JKR's mind. I personally thinks she does intend for the Snape/Black rivalry to be based on some deception. >Kneasy: > It all seems a bit vague; James hates Dark Arts yet wanders around > hexing students that annoy him. Sevvy is supposedly the Dark Arts > expert yet there are no examples given of him using them. Sure he > causes a cut on James's face, but what spell or type of spell it was > we're not told. For all we know it might be equivalent to Heidleberg > duelling stroke. Potioncat: And the cut seemed slight enough to ignore. We hear nothing more about it. Seems like a bloody nose in a fist fight. I still think Polyjuice is dark magic. It could only be found in a book in the restricted section, and the book, by Hermione's statement was full of dark magic. From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Sun Nov 28 03:09:26 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2004 03:09:26 -0000 Subject: dark magic was Re: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118674 > Potioncat: > And I'd be surprised if Sirius didn't point out how much Dark Arts > Severus knew, to draw attention away from the amount Sirius knew. Alla: Ummm, the fact that Sirius KNEW dark magic is kind of a given to me. You know, takes an expert to know one. :o) The fact that he run away from it is a given to me too. Potioncat: > The issue is, did JKR intend that. I think we all forget sometime > that the real back story only exists in JKR's mind. I personally > thinks she does intend for the Snape/Black rivalry to be based on > some deception. Alla: I will not be surprised AT ALL, if it will turn out to be true - you know, deception and misunderstanding on both sides of the equations. Like maybe Severus wanted to escape his home too, but for some reason could not, but Sirius did not know about it. Potioncat: I still think Polyjuice is dark magic. It could only be found in a book in the restricted section, and the book, by Hermione's statement was full of dark magic. Alla: Sorry not enough evidence for me to consider Polyjuice dark magic. Do you remember if they ever learned it in Potions by the way? From kjones at telus.net Sun Nov 28 02:57:02 2004 From: kjones at telus.net (Kathryn Jones) Date: Sat, 27 Nov 2004 18:57:02 -0800 Subject: What has Snape seen (Was Re: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <41A93E7E.50805@telus.net> No: HPFGUIDX 118675 > Hannah: > As to what he's seen or done, in some ways I hope he's not done > anything too awful, but OTOH I think it would be a bit lame if it > turns out he just hid away at HQ with his nose in a cauldron the > whole time. I reckon he'll have seen a lot of nasty things, and > done at least a few himself. For instance, I can see him managing > the Cruiciatius curse without too much difficulty, if it was on > the 'right' person. > > Not sending Snape out to fight would be wasting a valuable resource > for LV, IMO. All the signs point to him being pretty handy in a > duel, especially where he'd have the upper hand to start with. > There's the quick reactions, the ability to keep his cool (at least > in certain situations), his mastery of plenty of hexes... No, he'd > have been there at various muggle killings and Order fights, maybe > as Lucius' right hand man. Even once he'd turned spy he'd still > have had to participate when required in order to maintain his cover. Kathy writes: I think you have a lot of good points. I do wonder about his value to V as a fighter, however. This is not expressed very well in the books. He knows a lot of spells and hexes, he has several important skills, Legilimency and occlumency, he is capable with defense, using expelliarmus on Lockhart, and using a spell that cut James face in the pensieve scene. For the most part though, and this has been brought up by other posters, Snape,warns, threatens, tries to intimidate, but almost never takes direct action. In the stand-off with Sirius, he was waiting for Sirius to make the first move. The only indication of his power level is in SS when he attempts to control the broom wandless. He is fighting against both Quirrel and V. and holding his own. He was not the smartest student at Hogwarts, much as it pains me to say this, James and Sirius were considered to be the brightest. He is not described as tall in the books, (Sirius is taller) and he is thin. He has only two real claims to fame. 1) he is a Potion's Master and 2) he is a logical thinker. He appears to have some very strong inhibitions against actual physical or magical violence rather than the enjoyment needed to be a truly successful DE. He threatened Harry in the Shrieking shack several times, threatened Sirius at least once. This did have some effect, so Sirius obviously believes him to be capable. He got chewed on by Fluffy, and knocked out by Harry. The most he has done in the books as an adult was give Harry a good shove and perhaps, deliberately or accidentally explode a jar of cockroaches. I am not convinced that he is still spying. I suspect he would have chosen to remain in a position making use of his specialty and enjoying the status that he would have gained from that rather than risking himself on murdering muggles and fighting aurors. It doesn't even tell us in the books that he was killing flies, or stunning flies, or if it was even him in his memories. If he was a smart man, and Slytherin, don't forget, he'd have stuck his nose well into a cauldron and tried very hard to leave it there while eavesdropping diligently. Kathy J. From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sun Nov 28 03:13:53 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2004 03:13:53 -0000 Subject: Spy novel? maybe (was Lupin's secrets ) In-Reply-To: <20041126170007.47471.qmail@web53110.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118676 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Juli wrote: > > > > Lisa: > > Is it possible for Neville to turn to LV? LV might > > have had his parents > > crucioed into insanity, but power is one of the > > greatest aphrodisiacs. > > > Juli: > If you compare Neville to Pettigrew sure, but I don't > see them even a little alike, for all we know Peter > was a terrible wizard at school, and Neville isn't, > sure he may screw up ocasionally but mostly because he > lacks trust in himself, and he's quite good at > herbology, and when he tries he can get things done. > Neville hates LV and the DEs, At the DoM in OoP > Neville says something like "don't give him [Malfoy] > the prophesy, Let him kill me" or something like that > (sorry don't have exact quote), when I first read this > I thought Wow, that's very cool of him, he rathers die > or be tortured than let LV get anything he really > likes. I also remember when the DEs (including the > Lestrange) escaped from Azkaban, Neville was > furious... So, in other words No way will Neville join > LV or his DEs, his wounds are too deep. > > Juli Carol adds: I agree with Juli. Neville has shown moral courage almost from the outset of the books, standing up against his friends to try to prevent them from doing what he thought was wrong--exactly as Prefect Remus ought to have done, and Neville was only eleven, not fifteen. He shows physical as well as moral courage in the MoM, as Juli illustrated in her example. It's incomprehensible that Neville, whose family has suffered so much at the hands of Bellatrix and her followers, could ever join or consider joining the Dark side. His pain when Crouch!Moody Crucio'd the spiders is, IMO, sufficient evidence of the burden of grief he silently bears, as is the gum wrapper he pockets in St. Mungo's. Carol From willsonkmom at msn.com Sun Nov 28 03:42:14 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2004 03:42:14 -0000 Subject: Guerilla ? (Re: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118677 >Del wrote: > It is possible that DD told Remus and Sirius to avoid doing anything > that might further antagonise Harry to Snape, because it is crucially > important that Harry let Snape teach him Occlumency. In that light, it > becomes obvious that telling Harry that James and Sirius attacked > Snape because he was a junior DE was the last thing to do. > > Potioncat: I'm choosing this post to respond to because it's one of the later ones that discusses the possibility that James and Sirius hated Severus because they knew he was a DE. Well in GoF (IIRC) we have Sirius saying that he never heard anyone say Snape was a DE. And he doesn't think Snape was one because DD wouldn't hire Snape if he had been a DE. (He also says that Snape would have been cunning enough to hide it.) But my point is, 35 year old Sirius does not think Snape was a DE. So I don't think 15 year old Sirius thought so either. What ever bad blood there was between these boys does not excuse the incident. And I would say so even if it had been Snape who attacked James. Given how strongly the differing sides on the list feel about this incident, the threads that come up after HBP should be real doozies! From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Sun Nov 28 03:47:14 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2004 03:47:14 -0000 Subject: Guerilla ? (Re: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118678 > Potioncat: > But my point is, 35 year old Sirius does not think Snape was a DE. So I don't think 15 year old Sirius thought so either. What ever bad blood there was between these boys does not excuse the incident. And I would say so even if it had been Snape who attacked James. Alla: Yes, I know - Sirius did not know that Snape was a DE, Sirius knew perfectly well that Snape was into Dark Arts though. The bad blood between them does not have to be based on the fact that Snape was a DE, he may as well not have been recruited yet in school. Dark Arts and what they are based on is what seems to be divider, as I see it. And OF COURSE it does not excuse the incident, NOTHING does. Potioncat: > Given how strongly the differing sides on the list feel about this > incident, the threads that come up after HBP should be real doozies! Alla: LOL! From ReturnOfTheMutt at aol.com Sun Nov 28 03:47:47 2004 From: ReturnOfTheMutt at aol.com (ReturnOfTheMutt at aol.com) Date: Sat, 27 Nov 2004 22:47:47 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs Message-ID: <1d8.3140c38b.2edaa463@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 118679 In a message dated 11/27/2004 10:00:59 PM Eastern Standard Time, dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com writes: > Alla: > > I think the HINT of James already hating Dark Arts and especially > pureblood ideology IS there, namely his reaction to Snape calling > Lily a "Mudblood" > > "What?" yelped James. "I'd NEVER call you a - you- know what!" - > OOP, p.648. I'm sorry, but how does his exception to the term mudblood have anything to do with him being for or against the dark arts? [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From nrenka at yahoo.com Sun Nov 28 03:53:57 2004 From: nrenka at yahoo.com (nrenka) Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2004 03:53:57 -0000 Subject: Guerilla ? (Re: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118680 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "potioncat" wrote: > Potioncat: > > Well in GoF (IIRC) we have Sirius saying that he never heard anyone > say Snape was a DE. And he doesn't think Snape was one because DD > wouldn't hire Snape if he had been a DE. (He also says that Snape > would have been cunning enough to hide it.) > > But my point is, 35 year old Sirius does not think Snape was a DE. > So I don't think 15 year old Sirius thought so either. What ever > bad blood there was between these boys does not excuse the > incident. And I would say so even if it had been Snape who attacked > James. Well, GoF!Sirius doesn't think Snape was a DE (although he still mentions his association with the Dark Arts, which 15-year-old!Sirius might have or might not have too), but OotP!Sirius *knows* that Snape was a DE. Again, not to put it forth as an exculpatory reason, but does that shift in knowledge make some sense out of at least *some* of the animosity between the two in OotP? Snape is not the sort to be handing out either apologies or explanations, not that either is necessarily warranted, but...for a Sirius who has been on the run, never got to work through his own war issues in jail, was accused of being a DE himself--yeah, I can understand why he would find it a little bit difficult to take Dumbledore's word on Snape's conversion. I'm not saying that he shouldn't have, as I do believe that conversion to be genuine, and will be fairly gobsmacked if it isn't. But to brave the wrath of Godwin, it's still a little hard to take "Oh, he used to be in the SS--but now he's *our* ex-SS member!" (I think with a few modifications, the SS makes a good parallel to the DEs--upon request, I'll dig out the fascism analysis from wayback). From Sirius' perspective, he was right about Snape--and he probably wonders if/how Snape was involved in the death of past OotP members (a complete hypothetic at this point, but one can logically chain it to a minimum of aiding and abetting). From Snape's perspective...well, nobody knows what Snape's perspective *is*. Makes it hard to argue about it. -Nora politely points all comers back to her posts 118670 and 118630 for some discussions of ideology and character reactions From willsonkmom at msn.com Sun Nov 28 03:57:59 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2004 03:57:59 -0000 Subject: dark magic was Re: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118681 > Alla: > > Sorry not enough evidence for me to consider Polyjuice dark magic. > Do you remember if they ever learned it in Potions by the way? Potioncat: There is not enough evidence for it to be more than an opinion. This is what I recall: In CoS Hermione suggests they use the polyjuice potion that Snape talked about in class. Neither Harry or Ron remember Snape even mentioning it. They trick Lockhart into giving them permission to check the book out of the restricted section. Hermione says the book has lots of dark arts in it. (Am beginning to worry about movie contamination for that last part.) In OoP Harry thinks that he did well on the question about the effects of polyjuice potion because he used it himself. But remember, the kids learn about defending against dark arts, so the potion could be a dark art...Snape did not have them make it in class that we know of. He does know in GoF that someone is stealing supplies that would create polyjuice potion. I'm just not sure that the WW isn't as confused about ethics as we in the RW are. And I'm not sure everyone draws the line at the same point of "dark". From nrenka at yahoo.com Sun Nov 28 03:59:11 2004 From: nrenka at yahoo.com (nrenka) Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2004 03:59:11 -0000 Subject: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs In-Reply-To: <1d8.3140c38b.2edaa463@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118682 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, ReturnOfTheMutt at a... wrote: >> Alla: >> >> I think the HINT of James already hating Dark Arts and especially >> pureblood ideology IS there, namely his reaction to Snape calling >> Lily a "Mudblood" >> >> "What?" yelped James. "I'd NEVER call you a - you- know what!" - >> OOP, p.648. > > I'm sorry, but how does his exception to the term mudblood have > anything to do with him being for or against the dark arts? There's a fairly strong chain of textual associations between pureblood ideology followers, Death Eaters and Voldemort supporters, and the Dark Arts. These tend to be attributes that all cohere to the same people. The Malfoy family fits all three. The Black family, with a few notable exceptions (Black sheep? :) also fits. Snape is certainly not a Muggleborn, likely pureblood (per interview), has an unknown extent of fascination with the Dark Arts (present day, deep enough that Dumbledore keeps him away from the DADA position for his own good, also per interview), and used the word in question, as quoted above. I don't think these sets of associations are coincidental, but rather point to some linked ideologies underlying all of them. Of course, we could use some more information, but I have yet to see a character use 'Mudblood' who doesn't have some sort of association with Voldemort. (L.O.O.N.s--prove me wrong, please!) -Nora sees these three aspects twining together to form Voldemort's unique brand of fascism From bob.oliver at cox.net Sun Nov 28 03:17:48 2004 From: bob.oliver at cox.net (lupinlore) Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2004 03:17:48 -0000 Subject: Too "Good" Harry / The resolution of Snape In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118683 Lupinlore: > 3) a teacher who, despite supposed decades of experience, seems > totally incapable of dealing with the most understandable of > behavior from adolescent boys, much less of communicating > adequately with said adolescents, and finally; Alla: > By the way, I know I am being a bit slow, but who is number three > in your description, if you don't mind? Not at all. I mean McGonagall. Let's see, you have a boy who's seen one of his classmates die, is kept in the dark, ridiculed in the paper, and persecuted by a government official/teacher. Now, you are supposedly a teacher with years of experience in dealing with adolescent boys, but you seem totally unable to anticipate that Harry will be hurt and angry, and totally at a loss as to how to deal with this situation effectively. Granted, there are special circumstances and you are under orders from Dumbledore to be circumspect, but the best you can come up with is "Get a grip on yourself?" NOT impressive. NOT impressive AT ALL. Lupinlore From willsonkmom at msn.com Sun Nov 28 04:12:37 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2004 04:12:37 -0000 Subject: Guerilla ? (Re: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118684 >Nora wrote> > Again, not to put it forth as an exculpatory reason, but does that > shift in knowledge make some sense out of at least *some* of the > animosity between the two in OotP? Snape is not the sort to be > handing out either apologies or explanations, not that either is > necessarily warranted, but...for a Sirius who has been on the run, > never got to work through his own war issues in jail, was accused of > being a DE himself--yeah, I can understand why he would find it a > little bit difficult to take Dumbledore's word on Snape's conversion. > Potioncat: That's a very good point...in discussing OoPSirius and OoPSnape. And I think Sirius has as little reason for trusting Snape as Snape has for trusting Sirius. (I think Snape thinks Sirius betrayed the Potters.) But my point was replying to a post far up thread that said that James and Sirius were fighting a war against a DE. I don't think they thought he was a DE. From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Sun Nov 28 04:21:47 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2004 04:21:47 -0000 Subject: McGonagall in OOP. Was; Re: Too "Good" Harry / The resolution of Snape In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118685 Lupinlore: Not at all. I mean McGonagall. Let's see, you have a boy who's seen one of his classmates die, is kept in the dark, ridiculed in the paper, and persecuted by a government official/teacher. Now, you are supposedly a teacher with years of experience in dealing with adolescent boys, but you seem totally unable to anticipate that Harry will be hurt and angry, and totally at a loss as to how to deal with this situation effectively. Granted, there are special circumstances and you are under orders from Dumbledore to be circumspect, but the best you can come up with is "Get a grip on yourself?" NOT impressive. NOT impressive AT ALL. Alla: LOL! Thank you. Actually, I completely agree with you. I think that McGonagall rocked on many points in OOP. I loved how she handled herself when Umbrdige came to "inspect" her lesson, during "profession consultation", etc. But this remark I indeed consider to be idiotic. I expected MUCH more from Minerva. From nrenka at yahoo.com Sun Nov 28 04:22:49 2004 From: nrenka at yahoo.com (nrenka) Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2004 04:22:49 -0000 Subject: Guerilla ? (Re: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118686 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "potioncat" wrote: > Potioncat: > But my point was replying to a post far up thread that said that > James and Sirius were fighting a war against a DE. I don't think > they thought he was a DE. I don't either. But I do wave a little bit of a flag for the idea that they thought he was a Dark-Arts loving type, and that could be part of the reason they were persecutorial towards him in school. (That was the point of the post numbers I tagged in the .sig line). DE, no, as I don't think anyone would actually be a full-fledged DE while at Hogwarts. Recruit the kids after they graduate, not before. But certainly keep an eye on who looks promising, who shares the pureblood ideological orientation, who is interested in the Dark Arts (which seem to be based on something of an ethic of force and exploitation according to the desires of the caster without respect for the subject integrity of the victim) and shares the ideas behind them. "No good and evil, only power" sounds about right. We don't know if this accurately describes Young!Snape, and if the perception that it *did* was a component of motivation for James and Sirius. I think the latter makes sense, if you stitch together the arguments from the past few dozen or so posts. We are being drawn a picture of the Voldemort!Ideology, and it is not a pretty thing, composed of a number of aspects that all nest together snugly. -Nora drops off into sleepyland...zzzzz... From nkafkafi at yahoo.com Sun Nov 28 04:27:33 2004 From: nkafkafi at yahoo.com (nkafkafi) Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2004 04:27:33 -0000 Subject: Too "Good" Harry / The resolution of Snape In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118687 > Lupinlore wrote: > > > Yes, that is one of the questions we argue about, isn't it? > Chuckle. It does seem to constitute a basic divide among readers, > this question of the adults. I have to admit, I am of the opposite > inclination, and really don't see why people find the adults so > fascinating. I mean, we have, (IMO of course): > > 1) An emotionally crippled, semi-hysterical neurotic who seems to be > an adequate spy but other than that is rather a boring and > uninteresting Johnny One-Note with a penchant for acting the fool; > > 2) a passive-aggressive werewolf with a severe inferiority complex; > > 3) a teacher who, despite supposed decades of experience, seems > totally incapable of dealing with the most understandable of > behavior from adolescent boys, much less of communicating adequately > with said adolescents, and finally; > > 4) a headmaster who, despite supposedly being the most powerful > wizard in the world, lurches from one spectacular failure and > misjudgment to another > > I mean they really are a bunch of pathetic magical morons (chuckle, > IMO of course). At the end of OOTP, when the order threatened the > Dursleys, I was waiting for Harry to say, "Gee, thanks idiots. > You're only about fifteen years too late. Now, why don't you really > impress me and take care of your own Voldemort problems?" > Neri: Heh. A good post. I want to add that I became acquainted with the HP fandom only after reading OotP, and until then I have never even imagined that many people read the HP books for the adult characters. To me this sounds a bit like reading LOTR for the female characters, or reading "Pride and Prejudice" for the male characters. Sure one can do that, but why would one want to? In general I don't prefer adult characters over young characters or the other way around, same as I don't prefer male characters over female characters, or the other way around. The young characters (first Harry, then Ron and Hermione) are obviously in the center of HP. They are the characters that interest JKR the most, so they also interest me the most, or I wouldn't be a HP fan. But I must say that since I joined HPfGU I've learned about Dumbledore, Snape, Sirius, Lupin, Peter and James more than I have learned in five HP books ;-) Neri From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Sun Nov 28 04:38:00 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2004 04:38:00 -0000 Subject: Too "Good" Harry / The resolution of Snape In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118689 Neri: snip. The young characters (first Harry, then Ron and Hermione) are obviously in the center of HP. They are the characters that interest JKR the most, so they also interest me the most, or I wouldn't be a HP fan. > Alla: LOL! Neri, what if Harry does interest me the most, but other kids not much, although I am fairly interested in them as part of the story, can I still be a HP fan? Neri: But I must say that since I joined HPfGU I've learned about Dumbledore, Snape, Sirius, Lupin, Peter and James more than I have learned in five HP books ;-) > Alla: This part I wholeheartedly agree with. From jlnbtr at yahoo.com Sun Nov 28 04:40:35 2004 From: jlnbtr at yahoo.com (Juli) Date: Sat, 27 Nov 2004 20:40:35 -0800 (PST) Subject: McGonagall in OOP. Was; Re: Too "Good" Harry / The resolution of Snape In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041128044035.40007.qmail@web53110.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 118690 > Alla: > I loved how she handled herself when Umbrdige came to "inspect" her lesson, during "profession consultation", etc. But this remark I indeed consider to be idiotic. I expected MUCH more from Minerva. Juli: McGonagall acted very cool when she was faced with Umbridge, she put her in place, which I loved, but still think she could have done more for the kids while they were under the reign of terror of Umbridge, the kids were practically falling apart with the pressure of OWLS, so many restrictions and prohibitions, and she doesnt try to make their life any easier, all the says is You know who she works for Harry, son youd better be on her good side, or something like that. Just like all the other adults at the WW she thinks the kids are better of without knowing anything, and she doesnt tell them anything, sure there was that law or whatever that prohibited the teachers from telling the students anything besides their classes, but still they could have found some time or place to tell them the basics about whats going on and how to behave. Juli From imamommy at sbcglobal.net Sun Nov 28 06:26:21 2004 From: imamommy at sbcglobal.net (imamommy at sbcglobal.net) Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2004 06:26:21 -0000 Subject: McGonagall in OOP. Was; Re: Too "Good" Harry / The resolution of Snape In-Reply-To: <20041128044035.40007.qmail@web53110.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118691 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Juli wrote: > Juli: > > McGonagall acted very cool when she was faced with > Umbridge, she put her in place, which I loved, but > still think she could have done more for the kids > while they were under the reign of terror of Umbridge, > the kids were practically falling apart with the > pressure of OWLS, so many restrictions and > prohibitions, and she doesn't try to make their life > any easier, all the says is You know who she works for > Harry, son you'd better be on her good side, or > something like that. Just like all the other adults at > the WW she thinks the kids are better of without > knowing anything, and she doesn't tell them anything, > sure there was that law or whatever that prohibited > the teachers from telling the students anything > besides their classes, but still they could have found > some time or place to tell them the basics about > what's going on and how to behave. > > Juli imamommy: I'm not going to completely disagree with these staements, but would like to take a look at this from Minerva's POV. The kids are not the only ones under stress. MM has her own problems with Umbridge. First, there's her innate desire to be "proper," and to have a sort of professional detachment from her students. Face it, offering Harry a biscuit when he was sent to her office was one of the warmest gestures I've seen from her. She also tries to warn him right then, at the beginning of term, that he needs to tread lightly. Maybe she isn't very sympathetic, but that's how she runs her own affairs: keep your head down and stay out of trouble, and you won't have to fight so many battles. Also, she is known to be very close to DD, so she knows Umbridge will be watching her very closely. MM probably figures that the students are better off with her at Hogwarts than if she were sacked, so maybe she goes overboard to be "fair". And let's not forget, when she took the matter of reforming the Gryffindor quidditch team to DD, Umbridge decided she needed another decree to be able to supercede other teacher's authority. MM is also being deprived by the restrictions placed on the school, and she probably doesn't want to make it any worse for herself or any of her students. Thirdly, goodness knows what DD has asked her to not discuss with Harry, about LV, and the Order's plans, even though she knows about them and has to watch Harry suffer with these burdens. Minerva is not perfect, but I think she does the best she can under very trying circumstances. She does what her character allows, and if she'd been all warm and fuzzy toward Harry we'd be screaming that her characterization was inconsistent with the rest of canon. imamommy From katarina.anna at gmx.net Sun Nov 28 06:43:41 2004 From: katarina.anna at gmx.net (anna_ktrn) Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2004 06:43:41 -0000 Subject: McGonagall in OOP. Was; Re: Too "Good" Harry / The resolution of Snape In-Reply-To: <20041128044035.40007.qmail@web53110.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118692 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Juli wrote: > Juli: > > McGonagall acted very cool when she was faced with > Umbridge, she put her in place, which I loved, but > still think she could have done more for the kids > while they were under the reign of terror of Umbridge, > the kids were practically falling apart with the > pressure of OWLS, so many restrictions and > prohibitions, and she doesn't try to make their life > any easier, all the says is You know who she works for > Harry, son you'd better be on her good side, or > something like that. In defense of Minerva McGonagall: She supported Harry in a very underhanded way. Twice she offered him biscuits immediately after she berated him, and told him to not openly oppose the MoM. I have no doubt that Gryffindors have learned to read their head of house pretty well and to understand her "code". She tried to protect the students as best she could, with a better understanding of the threat Umbridge poses, than the kids have. Anna Newbie, Minerva supporter and Hermione fan. From catlady at wicca.net Sun Nov 28 10:40:09 2004 From: catlady at wicca.net (Catlady (Rita Prince Winston)) Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2004 10:40:09 -0000 Subject: Peter/Remus/Sirius/Severus/Veelas/Apparation/Magical Places/Blood Status Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118693 PETER Kneasy in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/118273 : << As for [Pettigrew] gravitating to the strongest - who's stronger than DD? No, I suspect that this is Sirius sour grapes; >> I have long agreed with the above, altho' I feel Sirius' resentment is that Pettigrew successfully fooled him, not something going back to schooldays. << <<< charme: I don't think this is the mystery you do. Hagrid is overwhelming a lover of animals and if he saw a rat, he wouldn't kill it, he'd feed it and take care of it. In other words, the similiarity there exists with Peter again being protected by the "biggest and strongest," just in a different sense. >>> Ah. I don't think you see what I was getting at. Scabbers has been around the school for years. How likely is it that Hagrid wouldn't recognise him? >> Personally, I think Peter hid in Hagrid's hut because he knew that the Marauder's Map doesn't show what's inside Hagrid's hut, and that Hagrid didn't return Scabbers to Ron because Scabbers successfully hid from him. As well as from whatever rat-eating indoor pets Hagrid might have -- he was feeding Buckbeak dead ferrets, a live rat might make a nice snack. Azriona in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/118416 : << 4. [Peter] found Voldemort in Albania without help. >> If Peter already had the Dark Mark, perhaps it led him there. << 5. He lured Bertha Jorkins to Voldy's lair, despite the fact that Bertha should have known that he was dead. >> Maybe Peter was just lucky that Bertha's damaged memory had forgotten that he was dead. Maybe she remembered that Peter Pettigrew was dead, but his face had changed with age and he didn't mention his surname. I sympathetically regard poor Bertha as the kind of old spinster optimistic enough to be eager to go for a walk with just about *any* unmarried heterosexual wizard over the age of adulthood. << 6. He gave Voldy some sort of body to exist in while waiting for the Final Task. >> Maybe he did. Maybe he used Voldie's wand to take poor Bertha's corpse apart and make a Frankenstein baby out of the pieces. But I'm inclined to believe the plausible tho' disgusting theory as to how Voldie, with a live male and a not-yet-dead female in his control, created his baby!body in something resembling the normal way (but faster, considering the short time between the end of PoA and the beginning of GoF). Did it require special spells and/or potions to embed Vapormort in the creature, or did Voldie just have to do his possession thing, and it made the body his own because there was no other soul there to conflict with? Maybe Franken!baby would have to be animated in order to be possessed, as we have no record of Voldie possessing inanimate objects? REMUS Olivier in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/118510 : << Even in the Pensieve scene, it is Peter and the pair James/Sirius who seems very concerned about being liked. Remus is utterly absent, he reads and wants to do some homework. >> I utterly adore Remus, but I must admit that in the Pensieve scene, he was only *pretending* not to notice what his friends are doing to Snape. The evidence that he noticed is that slight frown that appeared on his brow when James got started. To me, the frown shows his internal moral struggle between, on the one hand, he knows he should do his duty as a prefect by telling James and Sirius to stop messing with Snape, take points from them if necessary, but on the other hand, he is scared that if he does, James and Sirius and Peter won't like him anymore; his fear won out. He's not afraid of death or pain but he is afraid of being unfavorably regarded by certain few people he cares about. I don't know if young Remus recognized the bullying as morally wrong or merely as against the school rules. If he did (as Harry did, and most of the reader do, but James, Sirius, Peter, and a number of their watching classmates did not), then he had a separate internal struggle between the fact that he liked those boys and the fact that they were behaving in a very not-like-able way. << I always assumed Lupin did some teaching for a living before coming to Hogwarts [as DADA professor]. >> The Shrieking Shack scene in PoA, when Lupin explains about being a werewolf, his friends becoming Animagi, etc, is very irritatingly clear in using the term "paid work": "gave me a job when I have been shunned all my adult life, unable to find paid work because of what I am." I *wish* he had said he's unable to find "a job" or "employment", because I want to believe that he did get occasional work from people who either didn't know he was a werewolf or had work that could be done off-site. For example, I like to think that Dumbledore found a first job for Lupin when he left school, some translation or editting that he could do at home and send the completed pages to the publisher by owl. That would be 'paid work', but it wouldn't really be 'employment' because it was one set fee for one finished product. SIRIUS Hickengruendler in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/118587 : << who really thinks, that if the storyline weren't told from Harry's point of view but from a more objective one, Sirius would look as bad as Snape. A nasty, prejudiced and dangerous man (with a sad life, that makes his behaviour understandable), who nonetheless decided to fight for the good side. It's just Harry's rose-coloured point of view, that makes look Sirius better. >> You may be right, but I think that if JKR told the story from a more omniscent point of view than Harry's, Sirius would still look better, because I think JKR, not just Harry, likes Sirius. It may be that JKR is wearing the same rose-colored glasses as Harry, and not capable of being objective where Sirius is concerned. Me, I think Sirius is a better person than Severus is, much less nasty and somewhat less prejudiced. But JKR is very good at convincing me: she has made me like Ron and consider him a nice kid, even tho' in real life I have no fondness for ordinary normal sports-obsessed, schoolwork-hating, looks-ist kids. SEVERUS Olivier in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/118561 : << why [Snape] stopped Harry from warning Dumbledore in GoF when Harry met Crouch Senior >> *sigh* I wish I had bookmarked the post in which Pip!Squeak explained that to me. Harry ran to Dumbledore's staircase gargoyle guardian and unsuccessfully tried the years-old password "Sherbert lemon". When that didn't work: "But nothing at Hogwarts had ever moved just because he shouted at it; he knew it was no good. He looked up and down the dark corridor. Perhaps Dumbledore was in the staff room? He started running as fast as he could towards the staircase --" THEN Snape called him back: "'POTTER!' Harry skidded to a halt and looked around. Snape had just emerged from the hidden staircase behind the stone gargoyle. The wall was sliding shut behind him even as he beckoned Harry back towards him. 'What are you doing here, Potter?'" "'I need to see Professor Dumbledore!' said Harry, running back up the corridor and skidding to a standstill in front of Snape instead." Pip!Squeak explained that Snape had just come down from Dumbledore's office and knew that Dumbledore was on the way down behind him, so Snape prevented Harry from running off to look for Dumbledore in the staff room. Snape actually HELPED Harry get the info to Dumbledore promptly, altho' while doing so, he amused himself taunting Harry so as to make not only Harry, but us readers, think that he was HINDERING Harry from getting the information to Dumbledore promptly. Del in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/118430 : << Severus was unpopular because he was in the Dark Arts >> I don't recall the canon for *why* Severus was unpopular at school -- in fact, the canon I recall that he WAS unpopular was the Pensieve scene, in which many students enjoyed his humiliation and no friend defended him. Alla in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/118299 : << By the way, whatever happens, it is not going to be in book 6, you know that right? JKR said that we will find out more about Snape in book 7 >> It seems to me perfectly possible that Snape could die in Book 6 (I think he will last until Book 7 because 'he is such a gift of a character') and then Harry finds out more about Snape in Book 7, possibly by some normal mundane method like Dumbledore telling him (except I expect Dumbledore to die in Book 6) or Harry reads a letter or Will that Snape left. The Blood Status thread reminded me of the following: Some listie proposed a theory that Severus Snape was the son of Sirius Black's father by a Miss Snape (possibly a Muggle-born witch) and grew up in poverty and disgrace, desperately eager to win the regard of his father and yearning for the noble Dark Magic pureblood heritage that Sirius spurned. A personal reason for the two S's very personal animosity. The two might even have met as young children, if Severus's mother so impolitely took him to the Black house to demand her child support. VEELA Flop in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/118666 : << Kneasy said: << >>> Now, I agree that this is one possibility (you'll forgive me for snipping your support; consider it point taken) but I wanted to air my theory on the Veela. I had assumed them to be related to the Willis (or, in German: Vilja) who IIRC figure in Germanic mythology somewhere. I'm most familiar with them from the second act of the ballet Giselle. Basically, they take revenge on men who jilt their ladies by DANCING them to death! >> Flop is right, but omitted that Swan Lake is another ballet about a Veela/Vila/Wili/Rusalka/etc. ("Wili" is said to be the origin of the obsolete American slang phrase: "He's got the willies" meaning "he's scared"). The Veelas are from Slavic mythology/folklore. They are kind of like nature spirits, because they can bring good weather and good harvest to farmers who please them, and bad weather and other disasters to farmers who displease them. So there are holidays to put out food and flowers as gifts for the veelas. Various books say that they are the spirits of girls and young women who died unmarried and/or childless, so they still have unused fertility they can give to the crops. (Some books say they are the spirits of babies who died unbaptized or of women who were wicked. Some author pointed out that the more southerly vilas are nicer and the more northerly ones are nastier.) They appear as groups of beautiful young women, who dance in the woods and try to lure any man who walks alone in the woods to dance with them, and then dance him to death or something. (That probably would be a tale that mothers and wives tell to try to keep their sons and husbands home at night.) They take the form of swans in order to fly, and upon arrival at their dancing-place, they return to human form by taking off their swan skins. If a man steals a vila's swan skin, she has to marry him and keep his house and bear his children, but if she ever gets a chance, she will steal back her swan skin and escape. This is supposed to be the origin of the plots of Swan Lake and another ballet that I forget. (As well as reminding me of Irish tales about selkies and their seal skins.) (And one listie pointed out a possible resemblance to Hagrid's mother, a magical woman who was married to a human until she left or escaped.) The vila who live underwater, in streams and pools, come up to the surface to lure both young men and children to come be hugged. When the water vila is hugging and kissing a man or a child, she descends underwater, thus drowning the human she pulled down with her. The water vila are called 'nereids' in Greece ('nereid' is classical Greek for an ocean nymph and almost-modern English for a mermaid). Water vila are called 'rusalka' (plural: rusalki) in Bulgaria or someplace, from the name of the Greek holiday Rosalia, which IIRC has something to do with putting roses on the family graves (more death). Another listie added: Rusalki are from the Russian folklore, and they are water spirits. There was a traditional holiday in Russia, called Rusalnaya nyedyelya, or Rusalki week, the name is said to be derived from the name Rosalia. The week was dedicated to honouring the Rusalki. APPARATION Ces in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/118501 : << I think maybe Arthur or Molly goes and gets her and apparates with her? >> Is it possible to Apparate carrying another person? Does canon tell us? If it is possible, why did James tell Lily to 'take Harry and run', rather than 'take Harry and Apparate'? Juli in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/118348 : << I was driving to work and a thought came to my mind, how does Hermione goes to The Burrow and other magical places? >> The Burrow isn't the same kind of magical place as 12 Grimmauld Place, Diagon Alley, Platform 9 3/4 or Hogwarts -- it doesn't have spells on it to repel Muggles or make it invisible (or disguised as an old ruin) to Muggles or hide it by the Fidelius Charm -- we know that because three Muggle taxis drive there in GoF. The inhabitants must relay on distance from the main road, and being screened by trees and hedges, for concealment from Muggles. Is the way that the Leaky Cauldon is invisible to Muggles but visible to wizarding folk simply that it is disguised as an alley or something, or is it like the way 12 Grimmauld Place is concealed from those who haven't been told the Secret: neither it nor its space is there, and when it appears to Harry, it pushes aside the houses on either side of it? I thought that Diagon Alley and Platform 9 3/4 are spaces bigger inside than they are outside, like the Flying Ford Anglia, but the resemblance between Leaky Cauldron/Diagon Alley for Muggles and 12 Grimmauld Place for people who haven't been told the secret is confusing me. << I laugh at loud thinking of it: her very normal parents at the Burrow, Arthur showing them his muggle's artifacts collection, they must think he's crazy (just like Molly does). >> They presumably got used to it when they met in Gringotts Bank early in CoS. BLOOD STATUS Alshain in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/118274 : << For all that pure-bloods are said to be rare, there seems to be a lot of them dotted throughout the books. The Blacks, the Crouches, the Lestranges and the Malfoys are explicitly pure-blooded, the Fudges probably so as well (assuming that Cornelius isn't just projecting his own insecurities when he's placing overmuch importance on blood purity), the Longbottoms, the Snapes as per JKR, the Death Eater families -- Crabbes, Goyles, Notts, Mulcibers, Traverses, Rosiers, Wilkeses. Several possible others, including but not limited to Weasleys, Flints, Bletchleys, Warringtons, Bulstrodes, Derricks, Boles, Higgses, Montagues, Zabinis, Parkinsons, Puceys, Browns, Cornfoots, Greengrasses, and MacDougals. >> It is not an axiom that being a Death Eater (or in Slytherin House) proves being a pureblood. What JKR said about Snape in http://www.jkrowling.co.uk/textonly/news_view.cfm?id=80 is << 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. >> (Hi, khinterberg and Sandy gave the same quote much quicker than I.) Her statement that Muggle-borns are not allowed to be Death Eaters (and why would they *want* to join a movement whose goal was to kill *them*?) didn't rule out Snape and other Death Eaters being Halfbloods. In http://www.jkrowling.co.uk/textonly/faq_view.cfm?id=58 she said: <> I went web-searching for the Nazi laws and found a great deal of agreement among them that Nazi laws defined a "Jew" as a person with at least three fully-Jewish grandparents, or with two fully-Jewish grandparents and an affiliation with the Jewish community and "a grandparent is automatically considered a full Jew if he was a member of a Jewish community", but they had the term 'Mischling' for a person who had one or two Jewish grandparents but no affiliation with the Jewish community. 'Mischling' seems like 'mixed' and therefore I would imagine it to be the parallel to "Halfblood" to which JKR referred. I would understand why JKR mentioned Lily's GRANDparents if the Pureblood-ist definition of Half-blood dealt with the number of Muggle great-grandparents a wizard had (one Muggle great-grandparent makes him an octaroon, two a quadroon ... oops, sorry, wrong racism), but it seems that the Purebloodist call a wizard with one or two Muggle grandparents a Halfblood. Next, a distinction between purebloods and what Steve bboyminn called "Fullbloods". It seems to me that the purebloods are those whose ancestors for some number of generations or years were all magical folk -- it *might* be nine generations, as per Ernie Macmillan in CoS: "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 --" So suppose a person had a Muggle great-great-great-grandparent (five generations back); that person is not a Pureblood because of the Muggle ancestor within the set number of generations, but not a Halfblood either because of zero Muggle grandparents, so Steve labelled them "Fullbloods". The Death Eater ideology would make a Fullblood free to look down on Halfbloods and Muggleborns, and to *hunt* Muggles, as long as he/she looks *up* to Purebloods. A *lot* of RL people have the psychology that they don't have to be at the very top of the social hierarchy as long as there are more people under them than over them, so I'm sure many Fullbloods would join the Pureblood ideology, and Fudge seems to me to have the psychology to be one of them. It seems to me that the Purebloodists (unlike the Nazis) want to keep the Halfbloods alive and in wizarding society, so that they'll have someone to look down on and force to do the least pleasant work (and their descendents can eventually rise to Fullblood). Why that would encourage a Halfblood to join the Death Eaters, I can't imagine. From cmjohnstone at hotmail.com Sun Nov 28 12:08:20 2004 From: cmjohnstone at hotmail.com (littleleahstill) Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2004 12:08:20 -0000 Subject: McGonagall in OOTP (was Too "Good" Harry and the Resolution of Snape Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118694 Lupinlore wrote: >Not at all. I mean McGonagall. Let's see, you have a boy who's >seen one of his classmates die, is kept in the dark, ridiculed in >the paper, and persecuted by a government official/teacher. Now, >you are supposedly a teacher with years of experience in dealing >with adolescent boys, but you seem totally unable to anticipate that >Harry will be hurt and angry, and totally at a loss as to how to >deal with this situation effectively. Granted, there are special >circumstances and you are under orders from Dumbledore to be >circumspect, but the best you can come up with is "Get a grip on >yourself?" NOT impressive. NOT impressive AT ALL. Leah: I wonder if you underestimate the effects of recent history on the adult characters. Within (just) Harry's lifetime the WW has been engaged in the first Voldemort war, in which many lost a number of family members- and as Arthur said, lived in fear of finding the Dark Mark over their homes. In addition, thanks to Imperious, Polyjuice etc it would have been far harder than in a "normal" war to know who was your friend or your enemy. Further, McGonagall is old enough to have experienced the activities of the dark wizard Grindelwald (whatever those may have been), and surely the contemperaneous events in the Muggle world can not entirely have passed the WW by? Certainly within the Muggle world at that time, people were expected to 'get a grip' and get on with life - my father in law for example worked horrific nights as a fireman in the Blitz before getting on with his factory job in the day. I am not saying this is necessarily the right approach, but that it is unsurprising given the historical background and McGonagall's age. I do believe McGonagall does her best within character to stick up for her students- not only at some professional risk, but, as we see in the 'stunning' scene, at actual physical risk. And, on another tack, in McGonagall's eyes, Harry does need to 'get a grip'. Someone is out there to take advantage of any loss of self control. Leah From azriona at juno.com Sun Nov 28 13:07:49 2004 From: azriona at juno.com (Sharon) Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2004 13:07:49 -0000 Subject: Peter/Remus/Sirius/Severus/Veelas/Apparation/Magical Places/Blood Status In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118695 Mostly just Peter & Remus in this... Catlady: > Personally, I think Peter hid in Hagrid's hut because he knew that the > Marauder's Map doesn't show what's inside Hagrid's hut, and that > Hagrid didn't return Scabbers to Ron because Scabbers successfully hid > from him. As well as from whatever rat-eating indoor pets Hagrid might > have -- he was feeding Buckbeak dead ferrets, a live rat might make a > nice snack. Ooo, excellent point. Because Peter would know what the map would and wouldn't show, as he was one of those who made it, wouldn't he? >Azriona: << 6. He gave Voldy some sort of body to exist in while waiting for > the Final Task. >> > > Maybe he did. Maybe he used Voldie's wand to take poor Bertha's corpse > apart and make a Frankenstein baby out of the pieces. But I'm inclined > to believe the plausible tho' disgusting theory as to how Voldie, with > a live male and a not-yet-dead female in his control, created his > baby!body in something resembling the normal way (but faster, > considering the short time between the end of PoA and the beginning of > GoF). > > Did it require special spells and/or potions to embed Vapormort in the > creature, or did Voldie just have to do his possession thing, and it > made the body his own because there was no other soul there to > conflict with? Maybe Franken!baby would have to be animated in order > to be possessed, as we have no record of Voldie possessing inanimate > objects? > First, can I say, "Ew"? Either theory. I mean, ew. (Although the idea of current Voldy being Peter's sort-of son is kind of interesting. "Here, Dad, happy birthday to me, here's a silver hand." "Gosh, thanks son, let's go play a game of catch.") I would think, however, that in either case, Peter would have to have shown some amount of intelligence, either in the anatomical knowledge in creating a Franken!baby out of Bertha's parts, or speeding up the gestation process so that the bun would be out of the oven in less than a month, in order for Voldy to possess it by the beginning of GoF. Catlady: > I don't know if young Remus recognized the bullying as morally wrong > or merely as against the school rules. If he did (as Harry did, and > most of the reader do, but James, Sirius, Peter, and a number of their > watching classmates did not), then he had a separate internal struggle > between the fact that he liked those boys and the fact that they were > behaving in a very not-like-able way. > I think it was also something of self-preservation. "If I tell them that bullying is wrong, then I could very well be the next target." By remaining silent (and neither condoning nor condemning their actions), Remus is essentially keeping himself safe from being a target in the future. --azriona From hannahmarder at yahoo.co.uk Sun Nov 28 14:31:02 2004 From: hannahmarder at yahoo.co.uk (Hannah) Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2004 14:31:02 -0000 Subject: Spy novel? maybe (was Lupin's secrets ) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118696 > Carol wrote: > Regarding your statement that people sometimes choose sides not so > much on principle as because their friends or personal enemies have > chosen a particular side, I would not be surprised if this idea was > one of the reasons why the young Snape joined the Death Eaters. After > three years or so on his own without his Slytherin gang, he must have > felt an intense desire not only to rejoin his seemingly like-minded > friends but also to oppose whichever side James Potter and Sirius > Black had chosen. And that would, of course, have been the opposite > side to the former Slytherins. > > Dumbledore's statement that Snape *rejoined* the good side before > Godric's Hollow suggests to me that Dumbledore had considerable > influence over Severus during his Hogwarts years. (We know, for > example, that he didn't reveal for a very long time that Lupin was a > werewolf. Cf. als the question of what happened to Snape's *first* > chance.) During those last school years, DD must at least have had > some hope that Severus would ultimately choose his side over that of > the former Slytherins who had already joined LV. Hannah: I see lots of basis for your ideas, Carol! My favourite theory (as written in my fanfic) is that Dumbledore adopted Snape as a teenager (probably post 5th year), maybe is a relative of Severus', and everything was rosy for a short while... but Snape, expecting special treatment, soon got jealous of the Marauders and the apparent favouritism shown them by *his* mentor. I see Snape as very insecure (there were posts on this earlier this week). Constantly coming second place at everything to the Marauders, made him more and more bitter about them, and gradually began to turn him against DD, who wouldn't side with him against them. The final straw was James being made Head Boy. Studious, ambitious little Snape must have coveted the post, and when it went to his arch enemy - the reckless, rule-breaking, not-even-a-prefect Potter, he turned against DD. For Lucius Malfoy, who had already recognised Snape's worth while at school, it was an obvious move to get the boy on side once he graduated. All he'd have needed to do, IMO, is butter the boy up, tell him how his skills will be appreciated, how he can work his way up... Severus, delighted by the chance to be appreciated - and to get back at his loathed rivals - signs up without putting too much thought into what he'll actually be required to do. And at this point, LV hadn't shown his 'true colours' (he still hadn't when Regulus joined, and he's at least a year younger) so Snape may not have even realised just how nasty things were going to get. So Snape joins the DE's, at some point, for some reason, decides he's had enough, and goes back to DD to ask forgiveness, ending up as a spy. LV falls, DD vouches for Snape, gives him a job at Hogwarts to keep an eye on him and probably for Snape's own safety. Then back comes LV, and Snape needs a good explanation for DD having claimed him to be a spy. Easy. All Snape does is go back to the Lord of Darkness and say; 'Yeah, I fed the old fool a lot of nonsense about seeing the error of my ways. He didn't want to have someone associated with him named as a DE, so he made up the spy thing to get me off the hook and protect his own reputation. Now here I am, Lord, back again, and I can keep an eye on DD for you as well. Good eh?' LV, proud of his skill as a Legilimens, can detect no lie, and the story makes sense to him, and of course old Sev is quite an asset, especially now he's working at Hogwarts, so he welcomes him back into the fold. This theory would back up a lot of what Carol said in her post; Snape's first chance, him *re*joining the good side, the likelihood that DD had strong influence over him at school, how he managed to get away with going back to LV after being revealed as a spy, and why DD was able to decide to trust him. Hannah From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com Sun Nov 28 14:55:29 2004 From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (Barry Arrowsmith) Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2004 14:55:29 +0000 Subject: Choosing sides Message-ID: <8BB6C942-414D-11D9-8E13-000A9577CB94@btconnect.com> No: HPFGUIDX 118697 > Nora: A short post to address one issue, because this is not quite what Dumbledore actually says--if we're taking that as our basis for argument. It's pretty frequently misquoted. Dumbledore says, near the end of CoS, "It is our choices that show what we truly are, far more than our abilities." Show. Not determine. > True: all too often we get involved in threads, batting ideas, thoughts and theories back and forth and a kind of Chinese Whispers takes place. Unintentional subtle changes take place and it's only when the canon is checked that we realise the words are not quite what we had come to assume they were. But choices, now. I've long argued that Harry's have been limited, that he's not as much a free agent as would appear at first sight. I see disagreement looming; never mind, it'll all add to the fun, I hate it when too many fans agree with me, it shows I'm slipping. Naturally, his being dumped on the Dursleys was not his decision, it was DD's. And since I'm a staunch advocate of Puppetmaster!DD I think it quite possible that planting that cuckoo in that particular nest killed a number of birds with one stone. Two are pretty obvious (the need for blood protection and the wish to prevent him being 'spoiled') but I contend there's at least one other and it didn't come to fruition for ten years. Consider - if Harry had had a happy life among the Muggles, if all were sweetness and light with caring guardians, lots of friends at school, etc, would he have been so keen to jump into the unknown world of wizards? If, for example, Vernon had been the exact opposite of what he is, if Harry had come to like, even love and respect him, and Vernon had then advised him not to take up the invitation to Hogwarts DD would have been in a pretty pickle. And even if he did make the choice to step into a total unknown, would he have had the necessary self-reliance and resilience to be successful? Probably not IMO. Some may point to Hermione in a counter argument; here's a Muggle-born who jumped at the chance of switching worlds. I'm not so sure about her motives. Remember that in the first part of PS/SS she's not very nice at all, a positive pain in the neck in fact. Little miss bossy boots, Hectoring!Hermione. Just how many friends did she have in the Muggle world? Not many, I'll bet. She hasn't got many at Hogwarts - Harry, Ron, Neville - any more? If it hadn't been for the Troll incident she could easily have spent 7 years at Hogwarts and made no close friends at all. Anyway, back to Harry. There's a comment I passed a couple of days ago (and that Carol agreed with to a certain extent) that some, perhaps many choices are made not through high principles but because of where people you like/dislike already stand. And as things stood at the start of PS/SS it would be more or less guaranteed that Harry would choose the opposite option to any that Vernon favoured. DD already knew how bad they were and MM reminds him of the fact. (Though I've posited previously that at least some of the Dursley's attitude was more than just bloody-minded nastiness; there's a lot of fear in there too. They are absolutely terrified of magic and I suspect that the deaths of Harry's grandparents may have something to do with it.) Whatever - with Vernon as unwitting recruiting sergeant it's no surprise that Harry leaps at the chance to get out. And it's not long before he makes another choice based on personal antipathy - Draco Malfoy. The encounter in Madam Malkin's provides the basis for their future inter-actions. Harry decides he doesn't like Draco before he knows anything about purebloods, Slytherin House or it's association with Voldy. It's a purely personal reaction. Sometimes, boozing with friends, after the obligatory castigation of the managers of the brewery and the standard recitation of the iniquities and vileness of political scum, the talk may turn to more interesting, even esoteric subjects. An occasional and potentially entertaining theme (particularly if one is of a theorising bent) are the "what ifs" of history. What if Blucher hadn't reached Waterloo that afternoon in June? What if Elizabeth I had actually died of the smallpox that damned near killed her? What if Harold hadn't been killed by Duke William's last gasp desperation tactics at Hastings? What if there hadn't been a storm to scatter the Armada? Lots of scope for the fertile imagination. Well, there's another "what if" right here. What if Malfoy hadn't been in M. Malkin's emporium? Harry wouldn't have asked Hagrid about Slytherin and he probably wouldn't have been so adamant about not being sorted into it by the Hat. Or what if Harry had told Draco his name? Draco seems quite keen to recruit Harry into his circle once he does find out who he is. There's quite a reasonable argument in asserting that a chance encounter was influential in Harry choosing sides. But not satisfied with that, Jo works it a third time - Snape. If that first Potions lesson had gone differently - what? Being the sort of teacher ole Sevvy is it's unlikely that Harry would ever actually like him, but it probably wouldn't have degenerated into outright hate. A reaction on the personal level once again has long-term effects for Harry. And no, I don't believe Snape hates Harry. Doesn't like him much, that's for sure, probably never will, but I doubt it goes as far as hate. In fact it wouldn't surprise me if sometimes Snape retires to his dungeon and laughs his socks off at how easy it is to jerk Harry's chain. Predictable!Potter. It's the personal interactions that have set Harry on his course, not the high falutin' principles of social strife in the WW. He likes Hagid, his rescuer; Ron and Neville, both in one way or another fellow sufferers of childhood hardship; DD - the kindly old duffer that never holds him to blame for anything. Conversely there's Vernon, Malfoy, Snape and Voldy. Note that Harry never (until the climax of OoP) makes a conscious decision to confront Voldy. Throughout the books he keeps tripping over him unexpectedly and Voldy tries to blow his head off with boring regularity, not to say ineptitude. All Harry's interested in is getting out from under; actually facing down the epitome of evil is the last thing on his mind. He's reacting to Voldy - the killer of his parents and four-time aspirant for handing Harry the Black Spot - in terms of his own experiences rather than philosophical principles. It's personal. And it will continue to be so, at least with some of his betes noir, I think. Only next time, in HPB it's likely he'll have to think about what he's doing, why he's doing it and what the consequences are likely to be in much wider terms. We all do it eventually. It's called growing up. The choices made from now on really will show what he's made of. Kneasy From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com Sun Nov 28 15:20:43 2004 From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (arrowsmithbt) Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2004 15:20:43 -0000 Subject: Veela (was: When?) In-Reply-To: <20041128001251.21604.qmail@web41207.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118698 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Maria Holub wrote: > Kneasy said: > I suspect that Veelas are another mythological > reference that JKR has slipped into her books, this > time from Ulysses - Sirens. > > > Now, I agree that this is one possibility (you'll > forgive me for snipping your support; consider it > point taken) but I wanted to air my theory on the > Veela. > > I had assumed them to be related to the Willis (or, in > German: Vilja) who IIRC figure in Germanic mythology > somewhere. I'm most familiar with them from the second > act of the ballet Giselle. Basically, they take > revenge on men who jilt their ladies by DANCING them > to death! > Hmm. I see your point. Don't necesssarily agree, of course - that referee seemed to have things other than dancing on his mind. Most of the males I know avoid dancing like the plague; it'd take something seriously magical to get them to trip the light fantastic. Either that or the threat of severe sanctions and dire consequences from one's other half. It's nicely highlighted later in GoF in the way actually having to have a dancing partner to take to the Ball is greeted with horror and consternation. I bet 90%+ of males know that feeling from personal experience. T'ain't natural, I tell 'ee! Cuts down on drinking time. Kneasy From R.Vink2 at chello.nl Sun Nov 28 15:34:19 2004 From: R.Vink2 at chello.nl (Renee) Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2004 15:34:19 -0000 Subject: Too "Good" Harry / The resolution of Snape In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118699 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "lupinlore" wrote: > >Lupinlore: > It does seem to constitute a basic divide among readers, > this question of the adults. I have to admit, I am of the opposite > inclination, and really don't see why people find the adults so > fascinating. I mean, we have, (IMO of course): > > 1) An emotionally crippled, semi-hysterical neurotic who seems to be > an adequate spy but other than that is rather a boring and > uninteresting Johnny One-Note with a penchant for acting the fool; > > 2) a passive-aggressive werewolf with a severe inferiority complex; > > 3) a teacher who, despite supposed decades of experience, seems > totally incapable of dealing with the most understandable of > behavior from adolescent boys, much less of communicating adequately > with said adolescents, and finally; > > 4) a headmaster who, despite supposedly being the most powerful > wizard in the world, lurches from one spectacular failure and > misjudgment to another > > I mean they really are a bunch of pathetic magical morons (chuckle, > IMO of course). At the end of OOTP, when the order threatened the > Dursleys, I was waiting for Harry to say, "Gee, thanks idiots. > You're only about fifteen years too late. Now, why don't you really > impress me and take care of your own Voldemort problems?" > Renee: Yes, they're a rather sorry lot, but that's the human condition, isn't it - magic or no magic. Part of growing up is learning to see how flawed adults really are, and these books *are* about growing up (among other things, but IMO it's a pretty dominant theme). And Harry registers the adults' flaws and weaknesses quite unmercifully, as all attentive children and teenagers do, so that's the picture we get. There are signs, though, that Harry starts to notice he's not precisely perfect either, and that he may turn into another flawed adult in his turn. We're probably going to see more of this in Book 6. Renee From R.Vink2 at chello.nl Sun Nov 28 15:59:59 2004 From: R.Vink2 at chello.nl (Renee) Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2004 15:59:59 -0000 Subject: Problem with OotP? (was: Pampering) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118700 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "lupinlore" wrote: > > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "delwynmarch" > wrote: > > > > And then, things changed in OoP. The Dursleys suddenly seemed to > > become real people, Dementors haunt the neighbourhood, Harry starts > > bullying Dudley, Uncle Vernon tries to strangle Harry and gets > > shocked, and Aunt Petunia knows about the Dementors and receives a > > Howler. Things aren't fun anymore. > > > > So of course now, we're forced to consider the Dursleys like real > > people, and the way they treated Harry becomes very real abuse. It > > doesn't make sense to me because, just like you Kjirstem, I never > > really considered the Dursleys to be real people. But hey, it's > JKR's > > story, she can take it wherever she wants. We readers are not > forced > > to follow all the way, though. For now, I'm still happier with > > Parody!Dursleys. > > > Lupinlore: > I think herein lies the heart of the problem with OOTP, and much of > the problem with the "turn" of the series in OOTP. I suspect that > JKR wants to go "only so far, no farther" with the darkness and > realism. That is, we are supposed to accept certain things without > accepting their implications. The problem is, you can't have it > both ways. That's akin to throwing someone out a window and yelling > at them to stop halfway to the ground. > > Thus we are supposed to accept the Dursleys as "real" but not accept > the implication that their "real" behavior constitutes abuse. We > are supposed to accept Dumbledore as a real person who made a real > decision with real knowledge but we aren't supposed to accept the > implication that he is therefore party to said abuse. But that just > doesn't work, because you can't have it both ways. If the Dursleys > are supposed to be "real" as opposed to over the top parodies then > they are child abusers. And if Dumbledore is "real" in that context > he is party to child abuse. What is acceptable and uncontroversial > behavior in a fairy tale is not acceptable and uncontroversial > behavior in a story that aims to be "real." Renee: The turn towards more realism in OotP (a tendency already vaguely present in GoF) may be a function of the series, intentional on JKR's part: the black-and-white, less-than-realistic worldview of an immature boy aquiring more and more greytones as he grows up. Caricatures and fairy tales tend to work with black and white, which explains the Dursleys in the first books. I'm not sure, though, if JKR quite pulls it off. The change is a bit abrupt, maybe partly due to the fact that it took her so long to write OotP. And IMO, Slytherin House poses more of a problem than the Dursleys. In a fairy tale you can have a bunch of easily identifiable, no-good kids who show their true colours at the age of eleven. In a more realistic story, an element like this is somewhat disturbing; it smacks of predestination. Nor can it be countered by having one or two 'good' Slytherin students - unless these can act successfully as advocates of the true values of their house (as opposed to all the Pureblood nonsense) and effect a change in attitude towards their house in general. Maybe that's what the Sorting Hat's new song is pointing to. I do hope Book 6 will undermine the idea that one out of four kids chooses to be a potential terrorist at the age of 11. Renee From HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com Sun Nov 28 16:02:08 2004 From: HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com (HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com) Date: 28 Nov 2004 16:02:08 -0000 Subject: Reminder - Weekly Chat Message-ID: <1101657728.30.7444.m5@yahoogroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 118701 We would like to remind you of this upcoming event. Weekly Chat Date: Sunday, November 28, 2004 Time: 11:00AM CST (GMT-06:00) Don't forget, chat happens today, 11 am Pacific, 2 pm Eastern, 7 pm UK time. Chat times do not change for Daylight Saving/Summer Time. Chat generally goes on for about 5 hours, but can last as long as people want it to last. Go into any Yahoo chat room and type: /join HP:1 Hope to see you there! From mgrantwich at yahoo.com Sun Nov 28 17:11:58 2004 From: mgrantwich at yahoo.com (Magda Grantwich) Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2004 09:11:58 -0800 (PST) Subject: Snape and Dumbledore [was Spy novel?] In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041128171158.59993.qmail@web53104.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 118702 --- Hannah wrote: > This theory would back up a lot of what Carol said in her post; > Snape's first chance, him *re*joining the good side, the likelihood > that DD had strong influence over him at school, how he managed to > get away with going back to LV after being revealed as a spy, and > why DD was able to decide to trust him. Without coming down on one side or the other of your theory/plot (although personally I can buy it and think it's quite likely what actually happened), there is an additional piece of evidence for Dumbledore having some influence on teen!Snape. In the Shrieking Shack in POA, Lupin relates the story of the Prank and then says that Snape "was forbidden to tell anyone by Dumbledore". This puzzles me. Had parents found out that Dumbledore had let a werewolf into the school as a student he very likely would have lost his position and Lupin would have been expelled at a minimum. So what possible leverage did Dumbledore have over Snape that would have prevented him from telling anyone? If anything Snape was the one who was in the driver's seat and in a position to exact some kind of payment for his conditional silence. "Severus, I forbid you to blackmail me" is pretty much what it amounts to. Magda __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Read only the mail you want - Yahoo! Mail SpamGuard. http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sun Nov 28 17:14:58 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2004 17:14:58 -0000 Subject: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118703 Carol earlier (quoted by Kim) > "...all speculating at this point. I think that Sirius, for example, > associated Severus with what he hated about his own home and family, > which (for me) explains his vindictiveness. He may even have [rejected*] that hatred of the Dark Arts onto James as an explanation of why he disliked Severus. But James seems to be entertaining himself (and Sirius) by bullying Severus in the Pensieve scene. He dislikes him, certainly, but he doesn't seem to share Sirius's virulent hatred."> Carol again: *Actually I said "projected," not "rejected." I went up thread to check. Don't know how the quote could have been altered if it was copied and pasted, or left in the original snipped message, but it definitely has been altered. Carol, who was going to correct herself but discovered that the error wasn't her own From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Sun Nov 28 17:20:38 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2004 17:20:38 -0000 Subject: W6 - a low-grade essay about weapons of wizard war In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118704 Kizor0 wrote: > Wondrous and Wicked Ways of Waging Wizarding War snip. Thus, I present to you a short speculative essay about possible ways to utilise magic in war for no good reason whatsoever. Seriously. I have at least three ongoing assignments that could have used the time, what's wrong with me?. Alla: Kizor, I had a lot of fun reading your essay. I have never been good at "expanding" Wisarding World , but I am certainly enjoying how others do it. I only have a couple of brief comments to add, but I am sure others will have many interesting ideas to add. KizorO: > The Uses of Near-Instantaneous Travel > Apparating for short distances and Portkeys for long ones allow travel with neglible delay. Presumably it's still a second or few, making the methods unusable in battle (otherwise, I for one would not have barged to the Death Room through a door but Apparated two feet above Lucius Malfoy's head with steel boots) with the possible exception of fleeing. Portkeys do present an intriguing possibility; Key rings. Alla: I am wondering about VERY short distance apparation. Can wisard escape potentially deadly curse by apparating let's say one feet ahead or something like that? Kizor0: Command Centers The wizarding world has the means to make a center of operations at least as advanced as the Muggle world. As the Weasley's wonderful watches show, items can be made to show a faraway person's status without delay. Sirius' mirror demonstrates that communication between distant persons is possible ? perhaps hearing crystals small enough to insert into an ear? We don't know how hard it was to make the Marauder's Map and how much did the makers have to know about Hogwarts, but having a Phoenix's Parchment of at least some important locations sounds likely. Ask Harry for the Map for the war effort (could he refuse?) and use an Engorgement Charm on it, and you already have one of Hogwarts. Alla: I am still waiting for JKR to tell us HOW exactly members of the Order communicate with each other. I bet it will be improtant in the upcoming battles. As to marauders Map, sure, at one point I thought that Dumbledore already did something like that, while Map was not in Harry's possession. But if Harry took it from Fake!Moody's office, I don't know if Dumbledore had time to do something like that. From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sun Nov 28 17:26:19 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2004 17:26:19 -0000 Subject: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118705 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "delwynmarch" wrote: > > Valky wrote : > "I find totally strange that Sirius after all we know of him could > come across as a calculating murderer. That to me is no possibility. > If there is anything I think we know about Sirius now it is his heart, > and his heart is lonely, vulnerable and bitter, but not cold. > > In the context of a bitter rampage without thought to consequence I > can see Snape could have a point, but his statement is intended as > point to a cold feelingless evil Sirius, so I am sure he is not right > about that." > > Del replies : > I see what you mean. > > However, as you pointed out in another post, it could be that Sirius > had very deep issues where the Dark Arts were concerned. So is it > really impossible that he would have considered Snape to be so > dangerous that he would have seized the opportunity to rid the world > of him ? I wouldn't put it past him. > > Del Carol adds: We know that the older Sirius plotted for months to kill Peter, behaving like a homicidal maniac (attacking the Fat Lady's portrait and slashing Ron's bed curtains with a twelve-inch knife). He also would have killed Peter right in front of HRH if Harry hadn't stopped him. Given his tendency toward rashness and retaliation, he may also have intended to murder Peter after Godric's Hollow. So it's also possible that he wanted to kill Severus as well. It all depends on how deep his hatred went, regardless of its causes or whether the hatred was justified. At the very least, he was guilty of reckless endangerment, whether or not he intended for Severus to be killed or worse, bitten and turned into a werewolf. And the consequences for Remus would have been just as bad. So is the young Sirius merely thoughtless, reckless, and vindicative or actually murderous? His conduct can't be justified either way. Carol From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Sun Nov 28 17:32:39 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2004 17:32:39 -0000 Subject: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118706 Carol adds: We know that the older Sirius plotted for months to kill Peter, behaving like a homicidal maniac (attacking the Fat Lady's portrait and slashing Ron's bed curtains with a twelve-inch knife). Alla: Sirius wanted revenge, that is absolutely correct, but I would not call any thoughts in Azkaban "plotting", I would also argue that nobody can behave rationally right after Azkaban, but it is JMO, of course. From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sun Nov 28 17:42:53 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2004 17:42:53 -0000 Subject: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118707 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "ginnysthe1" wrote: > > Kim here, snipping liberally at post no. 118557 in order to ask a few > specific questions: > > Valky wrote: > The phrase "as though he had been expecting an attack" in no way > leads to an assumption that James was still armed. Snape > was 'expecting" an attack, from Harry's POV. This information > is gleaned by Harry, *strictly*, from Snapes reaction. If James' > wand was out before Snape moved, then the POV of Harry would not be > that Snapes reaction was *as though* he had been curiosity of the narration> *expecting an attack*, surely. > The appropriate wording in the case of James' wand already being out > and aimed at Snape would be: Snape reacted quickly to the impending > attack. The attack was not obvious, James wand was not drawn or > aimed. Of that I am entirely certain. > > Kim asks now: > > Has anyone else wondered, as I do now, whether we can really trust > the POV of pensieve scenes? After all, the pensieve scene in this > case is Snape's memory of what happened between him and James and > Sirius at the lake many years ago. Could Snape's memory of what > actually happened be a little fuzzy? Actually this scene is several- > layered -- it's the author/narrator's view of Harry's view of Snape's > memory... (isn't it?) > > Kim Carol responds: While I think that the memory itself, as preserved in the Pensieve, is an objective record of what happened, including parts that Severus himself did not witness or overhear, and Harry enters into and walks around inside that objective record, it's still Harry's perception of what happened as recorded by the limited omniscient narrator. In that respect, it's exactly like the rest of the book (with a few notable exceptions): We hear and see what really happened, but it's filtered through Harry's (not Snape's) POV. What Harry doesn't notice, e.g., James drawing his wand, we don't see either. Statements like "Snape was clearly unpopular" are clearly the narrator's interpretation of the scene, which reflects Harry's. The actions and words can, IMO, be regarded as objective truth within the context of the books, but interpretive statements should be taken with a grain of salt. We are not inside the heads of any of the characters in the memory and can only speculate as to their motives, but there's nothing "fuzzy" about the action and the dialogue in themselves--or the fuzziness comes from what Harry doesn't see or the narrator doesn't record, in addition to the interpretive statements previously mentioned. Carol, wondering how readers would react to the books if JKR had used a third-person dramatic narrator who presented the action objectively, from the outside, without *any* POV character Carol From mgrantwich at yahoo.com Sun Nov 28 17:45:55 2004 From: mgrantwich at yahoo.com (Magda Grantwich) Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2004 09:45:55 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] MM crush on DD? (was: Wondering.... about Snape & McGonagall) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041128174555.88170.qmail@web53108.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 118708 --- cubfanbudwoman wrote: > SSSusan: > Oh, goody! Someone bringing up MM's possible crush on DD! I was > hoping someone would pick up on that when I first posted on MM a > couple of weeks ago, but no one did then. > > So, what say all ye? > Crush or no crush? > Is DD aware? > Does he share the feeling? Sorry for taking a month to respond to this but I have a quiet day today and so will respond to all the posts I've been saving up for weeks and get them all out of the way at once. (MWAHAHAHAHAHA!) You have been warned. Yes, McGonagall has a crush on Dumbledore. She is a little embarassed by it, not being the kind of person who explains her personal feelings to anyone, especially about intimacies like this. She's not a giggly teen though; she doesn't have "Mrs. D" fantasies. She just wants to be at hand, being useful. Yes, Dumbledore is aware of her feelings. And while he doesn't share them, he's touched and flattered by them. He's an old man, just waiting for the final end of Voldemort before he sails to the far horizon from which no traveller ever returns, and he's also aware that he's more than twice McGonagall's age. He respects her tremendously, and if she finds him a worthy recipient of her affections, then he is honoured. But those kind of intimacies are over for him, and he does nothing to encourage her. On the other hand if she dies or is killed in the series, he will genuinely grieve like he will for almost no one else. (One does wonder what happened to those Aurors who hit her with four stunning spells at once. One trusts that their medical benefits cover the long-term treatment they will require once Dumbledore was finished - persuading - them how not to do things at Hogwarts.) Magda __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - Helps protect you from nasty viruses. http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Sun Nov 28 17:54:17 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2004 17:54:17 -0000 Subject: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118709 > Carol responds: Statements like "Snape was clearly unpopular" are clearly the narrator's interpretation of the scene, which reflects Harry's. The actions and words can, IMO, be regarded as objective truth within the context of the books, but interpretive statements should be taken with a grain of salt. We are not inside the heads of any of the characters in the memory and can only speculate as to their motives, but there's nothing "fuzzy" about the action and the dialogue in themselves--or the fuzziness comes from what Harry doesn't see or the narrator doesn't record, in addition to the interpretive statements previously mentioned. Alla: True, I guess - interpretive statements should be taken with grain of salt, but I would argue that in this case the narrator makes the MOST reasonable interpretation. "Students all around had turned to watch. Some of them had gotten to their feet and were edging nearer to watch. Some looked apprehensive, others entertained. .... Several people watching laughed." - OOP, paperback, p.646. So, at least some people clearly ENJOYED Snape's misery. Their ACTIONS showed that. Why? I don't know, but I sure want to know. So, what other interpretation will be more objective, in your opinion? From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sun Nov 28 17:59:49 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2004 17:59:49 -0000 Subject: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118710 > Kim now: > I think what may be missing in our interpretations is that in this > scene James sees Severus in the light of his and Severus's own > personal history together, a history which we can't see from our > reader's POV. As a possible history, I'll offer this: After they > first met one another, it somehow became apparent to James that > Severus was a pureblood snob. Severus may be a "shabby-genteel" > pureblood snob (hence the dingy underpants?), but he's a snob > nonetheless. And pure-blood James doesn't like snobs. Why this is > so, I've no idea, but I think it is so. (Also, pureblood Sirius > doesn't like snobs either, does he, hence part of the reason for his > dislike of his own family?) Carol responds: Actually, I don't think snobbery is quite the right word here, since Sirius comes across as arrogant and haughty himself, much like his cousin Bellatrix in the Pensieve scene. He wants his friend James, who is arrogant in a different "admire me" sort of way to entertain him. Sirius says that the Blacks in general behave like royalty, a point that's confirmed by the "Nature's Nobility" book title. Sirius at fifteen, despite his rejection of the Dark Arts, still considers himself too good or too smart to study (see his rude remark to Remus regarding the Transfiguration exam). I don't think the "arrogant little berks" are rejecting snobbishness per se. They, too, seem to think they're better than everyone else. I think whatever is between them and Severus is personal, possibly an instinctive dislike of a skinny, greasy but talented boy on James's part and a projection of his own hated Dark Wizard family onto Severus by Sirius. Certainly Sirius's dislike of his own family plays a part here, but IMO it's not the snobbery he's rejecting. He's a snob himself, as indicated by his scornful disregard of the girls who think he's handsome and his treatment of the other Marauders, even James. Carol, who really should stop replying to this thread! From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sun Nov 28 18:16:11 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2004 18:16:11 -0000 Subject: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118711 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "dumbledore11214" wrote: > > > Carol: > I think *Sirius* hates Severus because he associates him (and > Slytherin in general) with the Dark Arts. But James didn't come > from a family of Dark Wizards (AFAWK) an his parents are still alive > at that point. He would have no personal motive for hating the Dark > Arts or Slytherin or anyone else, including Severus Snape, whom he > admits has done nothing to him at that point. James doesn't seem to > be taking much of anything seriously, except the Transfiguration > that he learned earlier to transfigure himself into an Animagus. > > > > Alla: > > We don't know whether James had personal motive for hating Dark Arts > or not. All we know that he always hated them. I can very easily > come up with personal motive for James - let's say his family were > Aurors and someone WAS killed by DE. > > We also don't know how seriously James took things when he was > fifteen. Carol responds: The statement that James always hated the Dark Arts comes from Sirius, twenty years after the Pensieve incident. As I've said before, he may be *orojecting* his own feelings, or James's *later* feelings, onto James at this time. We don't hear James himself speaking on the subject. And we *do* know that he didn't take the DADA exam seriously--look at his remarks about the werewolf question (in careless disregard about Remus's feelings) and the traced and retraced initials LE. That's where James's mind appears to be--on Lily and the midnight adventures with a werewolf. While Remus is trying to study, James is entertaining himself (and the sycophantic Wormtail) by tossing a snitch. If you see any indication in that scene that James took *anything* seriously, please quote it. He doesn't strike me as a gurilla in the war against Voldemort or any kind of hero at this point. It took, IMO, something drastic--perhaps the murder of his parents by DEs--to transform Pensieve James into the James of Godric's Hollow. It appears that you're taking Sirius's statement about James's hatred of the Dark Arts at face value. I think that Sirius is not a reliable source of information on the subject. He's too close to James, after twelve years in Azkaban brooding on his wrongs and only two years to partially recover in the horrible Black mansion, to be an objective witness. IMO, we need confirmation from a more reliable source in order to regard that statement as a canonical description of James's views when he was fifteen. Carol, ironing her hands for being unable to stop responding to this thread From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Sun Nov 28 18:23:53 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2004 18:23:53 -0000 Subject: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118712 > Carol responds: >The statement that James always hated the Dark Arts comes from Sirius,twenty years after the Pensieve incident. As I've said before, he may be *orojecting* his own feelings, or James's *later* feelings, onto James at this time. We don't hear James himself speaking on the subject. Alla: I think Nora made a marvelous argument on why "it does not have to be personal for James in order for him to hate Dark Arts". Carol: He doesn't strike me as a gurilla in the war against Voldemort or any kind of hero at this point. It took, IMO, something drastic-- perhaps the murder of his parents by DEs--to transform Pensieve James into the James of Godric's Hollow. Alla: We differ on this one. Carol: > It appears that you're taking Sirius's statement about James's hatred of the Dark Arts at face value. I think that Sirius is not a reliable source of information on the subject. He's too close to James, after twelve years in Azkaban brooding on his wrongs and only two years to partially recover in the horrible Black mansion, to be an objective witness. IMO, we need confirmation from a more reliable source in order to regard that statement as a canonical description of James's views when he was fifteen. Alla: Yes, I do. I said that earlier - we DON'T KNOW how objective witness ANY of the characters is at this point, except Voldemort,w ho had been caught lying and Dumbledore, who we KNOW from JKR withholds information. IF I will doubt ANY character's testimony, I will not be able to support ANY of my arguments with canon's testimony. Untill Sirius is PROVEN to be a liar, I will take his testimony seriously, I see no reason not to. I even take his testimony about Snape to be true, but I understand why others may not want to, but not to take his words about James as truthful? I see absolutely no reason why. From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sun Nov 28 18:39:13 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2004 18:39:13 -0000 Subject: Another Flint? (Was: When?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118713 Hannah wrote: > The problem I have with the idea that maybe Harry's been > imperio'd at some other time without knowing it, is that the > narrative is from Harry's point of view. If Harry didn't know he'd > been imperio'd (and I'm sure we'd have heard about it if he did), > then I don't think the narrator would either. Also, if Harry had > felt that mind-numbing sensation at any point during canon, it would > have said as much, I think. > >> It also depends on the interpretation. With the veela thing, I > don't think anyone's sugggesting that they are actually > using 'imperio,' just that their presence naturally exerts a similar > effect, at least on men. Does JKR mean he's felt that specific > spell's effect on three occasions, or is she referring to the mind- > numbing feeling in general? Or is she just having trouble with her > maths again? > > Although the conspiracy therorist in me hates to admit it, I think > the 'three times' must be a FLINT. Carol responds: I agree that the passage describes the sensation--not so much mind-numbing as blissfully happy and unaware of anything except that feeling--rather than to the actual experience of being Imperio'd. I'm wondering whether someone with a little more time on his or her hands will present the three passages together for comparison (the Veelas, the first Imperio by Crouch!Moody, and the Imperio by Voldemort). If the sensation is virtually identical, then I would guess that's what JKR meant by "for the third time in his life." Otherwise, I think it's a Flint. I certainly can't think of any point at which Harry does something out of character in a similarly euphoric state. And it's interesting that he's less susceptible to the Veelas than Ron is, just as he's less susceptible to the Imperious Curse (possibly one of the "powers" he acquired from Voldemort?). Speaking of Flints, has anyone wondered how the Dementors could bury the polyjuiced Mrs. Crouch if they're blind? And I half-recall a passage in GoF in which Hermione, who is usually right about such things, refers to them as if they're able to see through an invisibility cloak. (Can anyone find and quote that passage?) I wonder if the blindness of the Dementors is something JKR attributed to them late in the game, not realizing that OoP would contradict GoF. Carol, wondering how the Dementors would have recognized Sirius Black if they can't see From willsonkmom at msn.com Sun Nov 28 18:44:22 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2004 18:44:22 -0000 Subject: Trusting characters Re: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118714 > Alla: >> IF I will doubt ANY character's testimony, I will not be able to > support ANY of my arguments with canon's testimony. > > Untill Sirius is PROVEN to be a liar, I will take his testimony > seriously, I see no reason not to. > > I even take his testimony about Snape to be true, but I understand > why others may not want to, but not to take his words about James as > truthful? I see absolutely no reason why. Potioncat: I take some characters' testimony as fact, unless I have a particular reason to doubt it. I take some characters' testimony as false, unless it is supported in other ways. For example, I believe DD tells the truth, but he's been known to tell only part of the truth or to actually mislead. I trust McGonagall when she says Peter was not up to the standard of James and Sirius. And it makes me wonder about all the "great" things Peter has appeared to do in the service of LV. I would not take anything Sirius said about Snape at full face value. I would not take anything Snape said about Sirius at full face value. So I do not discount Snape being well versed in Dark Arts, but I wonder about it. And I do not think Sirius intended to kill Snape, but I wonder about it. From mgrantwich at yahoo.com Sun Nov 28 18:57:27 2004 From: mgrantwich at yahoo.com (Magda Grantwich) Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2004 10:57:27 -0800 (PST) Subject: Peter/Creevey parallels (was DD and the rat) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041128185727.444.qmail@web53102.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 118715 --- carolynwhite2 wrote: > The way the Creevey [read 'creepy'] brothers behave towards Harry > is very similar to Peter's abject sycophancy with James. Harry so > far has not been quite so nasty to them as the rest of MWPP were > towards Peter, but he seems fairly tempted, and who can blame him? > They are extremely irritating. The relationship (if we can call it that; it seems more like a sporadic distant acquaintance) between pre-OOTP Colin Creevey and Harry might be a good starting point to understand the relationship between Peter and James. When Harry first meets Colin he finds him an irritating little shutterbug who has no idea how annoying he is with his constant "All right, Harry?" and his popping up everywhere Harry goes. Harry would be well within his rights to tell Colin where to stick his camera but he never does, preferring to duck and run when he can and to suck it up stoically when he can't. Harry is just basically too nice a guy to tell Colin to get lost. I can see Peter treating James the same way when they were first years, and having even more scope for his adulation by being dormmates with him. I think James had pretty much the same reaction Harry did: he found it annoying but also amusing, and he might have thought that befriending Peter would help him get over this hero-worship faster. I can also see an 11-year-old Sirius being far less reticent in his own treatment of Peter, and it's probable that James found himself shielding Peter to some extent. By the time the Pensieve incident took place, James had got to the point of simply not really seeing Peter's adulation anymore. It had just become part of the background noise for him. Of course, to other people not close to the foursome, Peter's attitude would seem quite over the top - which is how Harry saw it when he looked into the Pensieve. I think James pretty much had his head screwed on straight - he didn't take Peter's hero-worship seriously, and his friends knew it. As for what other people thought - who cared? Until Lily Evans, that is. Magda __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sun Nov 28 19:01:07 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2004 19:01:07 -0000 Subject: What has Snape seen (Was Re: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118716 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Hannah" wrote: > > > Magda: > > > Interesting that she says "he will have SEEN things that..." > > > not "he will have DONE things that..." > > > Assistant-to-Voldemort's-Potion-Master!Snape sounds quite likely. > > > > Kathy Wrote: > > I would assume that it would be unlikely for students to be > > marked as full DE's due to the lack of privacy. I would also tend > to > > assume, considering the general dumbness of most of the other > > deatheaters that Snape was a relatively good score for Voldemort > and he > > would have treated Snape decently at first. It would not be out > of the > > question for V to possibly arrange an aprrenticeship for Snape to > > become a Master of Potions in order to provide whatever > substances V. > > required for his imortality, and whatever research might be > required. In this scenario, Snape might have joined the DE's > shortly after > > graduation, and served his apprenticeship requirements. Once this > had been completed, he would then have been expected to take his > place among the DE's, which would be just about the time he went to > Dumbledore. It could be that the first few requirements of V's was > more than he could > > stomach. As a spy, at that time, as Dumbledore stated, he would > have been expected to participate or perhaps produce potion > requirements and > > still maintain his cover. It certainly takes up the 5-6 year time > span between graduation and V's fall. > > Hannah: In some interpretations of the timeline, that gap is as > short as 4 years. That's not that long for Snape to join the DE's, > be one for a while, change his mind, switch sides, and spy of a > bit. I also agree that Snape would have been quite a good catch for > LV. So I think he joined up shortly after graduation, maybe late > that summer or the following autumn. Also, his friends (Lucius, > Bella, Rodolphus) that were in his 'gang' would probably already > have been in by then, and keen for little Sevvie to join them. > > Snape must have had some sort of 'respectable' job as well as being > a DE. He hadn't been accused of being a DE before LV fell (or > Sirius would have known), so presumably he had some sort of cover. > Maybe he worked for a potions making company, or at St. Mungo's > (they must have in house potions makers). > > As to what he's seen or done, in some ways I hope he's not done > anything too awful, but OTOH I think it would be a bit lame if it > turns out he just hid away at HQ with his nose in a cauldron the > whole time. I reckon he'll have seen a lot of nasty things, and > done at least a few himself. For instance, I can see him managing > the Cruiciatius curse without too much difficulty, if it was on > the 'right' person. > > Not sending Snape out to fight would be wasting a valuable resource > for LV, IMO. All the signs point to him being pretty handy in a > duel, especially where he'd have the upper hand to start with. > There's the quick reactions, the ability to keep his cool (at least > in certain situations), his mastery of plenty of hexes... No, he'd > have been there at various muggle killings and Order fights, maybe > as Lucius' right hand man. Even once he'd turned spy he'd still > have had to participate when required in order to maintain his cover. Carol responds: The only problem I have with Hannah's interpretation is that if young Snape had actually performed a Cruciatus or other illegal curse, it would have showed up in a Priori Incantatem on his wand (if one was done, and I don't see why it wouldn't) and Crouch Sr. would have sent him to Azkaban rather than believing Dumbledore that Snape had reformed and was now a spy. He could easily have used that slew of hexes and curses in any duels or fights without "dirtying" his wand by using an Unforgiveable. As cunning as Snape is, I think he could have managed to please, and fool, Voldemort without actually performing any Unforgiveables himself. But he may well have concocted undetectable poisons (bottled Death?) as well as immortality potions. He might even have learned to concot Veritaserum and the Wolfbane Potion in LV's service, the latter as part of LV's attempt to recruit werewolves to his side. I don't think Snape is sinless, by any means, but I do think he would have kept the record of his spells as clean as possible out of self-preservation, if for no other motive. If he could use a legal spell rather than an illegal one, I think he would have done so. And note that he can sometimes cast spells without saying them aloud, so the other DEs, unless they were watching the color of the light that came out of his wand instead of doing their own job, would not have known the difference. Also, as I've said before, Voldemort generally placed his DEs where they were most useful. He had an Imperius expert, named in Karkaroff's testimony, Cruciatus experts like Bellatrix and probably Barty Jr. (an eager little fanatic who would not have hesitated to use any Unforgiveable in the service of his "master"), and designated murderers (Dolohov and Rosier, IIRC). Macnair is evidently his creature killer (oddly preferring an axe to a wand). Regulus, not particularly talented or brave as far as we can tell, would have been low in the ranks and would have had to do what he was told or die. Snape, IMO, would have insinuated his way to the top, making sure that LV knew his talents and put them to their best use. And the best use for him would have been what only he could do, not what many other supporters could do equally well. Above all, good as Dumbledore is at forgiving, would he have hired Snape if he had actually Crucio'd or AK'd innocent people? Snape's fascination with the Dark Arts does not necessarily translate into a fascination with illegal and Unforgiveable Curses. Carol, noting that JKR was very careful in her response about Thestrals to avoid suggesting that the deaths Snape had witnessed were his own doing From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com Sun Nov 28 19:05:48 2004 From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (arrowsmithbt) Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2004 19:05:48 -0000 Subject: Snape and Dumbledore [was Spy novel?] In-Reply-To: <20041128171158.59993.qmail@web53104.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118717 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Magda Grantwich wrote: > > In the Shrieking Shack in POA, Lupin relates the story of the Prank > and then says that Snape "was forbidden to tell anyone by > Dumbledore". > > This puzzles me. Had parents found out that Dumbledore had let a > werewolf into the school as a student he very likely would have lost > his position and Lupin would have been expelled at a minimum. So > what possible leverage did Dumbledore have over Snape that would have > prevented him from telling anyone? If anything Snape was the one who > was in the driver's seat and in a position to exact some kind of > payment for his conditional silence. > > "Severus, I forbid you to blackmail me" is pretty much what it > amounts to. > Others have wondered about the lack of repercussions from the Shrieking Shack incident too. If the word had spread Lupin, Sirius and probably DD would have been out on their collective ear. Blackmail only raises it's ugly head if Sevvy demands some reward or advantage for keeping quiet. But it's difficult to imagine anything that he'd want more than seeing Sirius and if possible his friends, suffer. He should have been shouting "Murderer! Werewolf!" from the rooftops. He didn't and I don't understand why. What could DD have done to Snape? Thrown him out of Hogwarts perhaps. For what reason? Being a victim? But I bet that'd be reversed once Snape's story hit the newspapers or the Ministry. He'd be seen as the injured party, the almost victim of a malicious, murderous deception by a scion of the very nasty Black family. Lots of people ask why DD trusts Snape; there was a thread a few months ago where I turned that around. Why on earth should Snape trust Dumbledore? Snape is firmly convinced that Sirius deliberately tried to kill him, yet so far as we know there were no unpleasant consequences for Sirius. Would Snape feel as if justice had been served? Probably not. So why would he trust DD enough to put his life in DD's hands? We don't know. Frustrating isn't it? Kneasy From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sun Nov 28 19:13:51 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2004 19:13:51 -0000 Subject: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118718 Potioncat wrote: > > Severus knew more dark arts than "most 7th years" when he arrived at > Hogwarts. It appears normal for 7th years to know dark arts...not > wrong, not illegal...normal. Carol responds: IIRC, Sirius says that little Severus knew more *curses*, not more Dark Arts, than most seventh years when he entered Hogwarts. So knowing curses is normal for older students, but Sevvie appears to be something of a prodigy in this regard. As for the Dark Arts, they're not taught at Hogwarts and it's not really clear how much young Severus knew or how his fascination showed itself--other than an obsession with *Defense Against* the Dark Arts revealed by his behavior during and after the DADA exam in the Pensieve scene. As Sirius Black is our only witness for both the curses Sevvie knew and his early interest in the Dark Arts, it's hard to know whether to accept either statement at face value. (It's true that Percy says in SS/PS that the adult Snape "knows an awful lot about the Dark Arts" (Am. ed. 126), but that could be hearsay and in any case does not apply to the boy Severus. Carol, trying to avoid calling the kids by their last names even though the narrator does it From stonehenge.orders at verizon.net Sun Nov 28 15:31:12 2004 From: stonehenge.orders at verizon.net (kjirstem) Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2004 15:31:12 -0000 Subject: Pampering (was Re:Harry at the Dursleys) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118719 Del wrote: > And then, things changed in OoP... Aunt Petunia knows about the Dementors and receives a Howler. Things aren't fun anymore. Del later: > For now, I'm still happier with Parody!Dursleys. Lupinlore: > If the Dursleys are supposed to be "real" as opposed to over the top parodies then they are child abusers. And if Dumbledore is "real" in that context he is party to child abuse. What is acceptable and uncontroversial behavior in a fairy tale is not acceptable and uncontroversial behavior in a story that aims to be "real." kjirstem: That sentence of Petunia's certainly caused a major lurch in my understanding of the Dursleys, but for me the effect was more that of a mask slipping or a curtain accidentally pulled aside revealing something beyond my previous knowledge. I wouldn't go so far as to say they are "real", just different. And then the mask goes back up and we're left wondering what we've seen. In some ways this reminds me of Wizard of Oz (movie version) and the humanity of the wizard being revealed...but he still isn't real afterwards. From katarina.anna at gmx.net Sun Nov 28 15:47:45 2004 From: katarina.anna at gmx.net (anna_ktrn) Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2004 15:47:45 -0000 Subject: Choosing sides In-Reply-To: <8BB6C942-414D-11D9-8E13-000A9577CB94@btconnect.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118720 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Barry Arrowsmith wrote: > Kneasy: > If, for example, Vernon had been the exact opposite of what he > is, if Harry had come to like, even love and respect him, and Vernon > had then advised him not to take up the invitation to Hogwarts DD would > have been in a pretty pickle. And even if he did make the choice to > step into a total unknown, would he have had the necessary > self-reliance and resilience to be successful? Probably not IMO. Whyever not? What sets Harry apart from other Muggle-borns who manage just fine? I see no indication anywhere that a rotten childhood in the Muggle world is a prerequisite to love Hogwarts. > Some may point to Hermione in a counter argument; here's a Muggle-born > who jumped at the chance of switching worlds. I'm not so sure about > her motives. Remember that in the first part of PS/SS she's not very > nice at all, a positive pain in the neck in fact. Little miss bossy > boots, Hectoring!Hermione. Not all of Hogwarts's Muggle-born students are as socially awkward, as Hermione used to be. She switched worlds because she got the letter, and realized that she is a witch. What more reasons do any of the Muggle-borns have? > Well, there's another "what if" right here. What if Malfoy hadn't been > in M. Malkin's emporium? Harry wouldn't have asked Hagrid about > Slytherin and he probably wouldn't have been so adamant about not being > sorted into it by the Hat. Or what if Harry had told Draco his name? > Draco seems quite keen to recruit Harry into his circle once he does > find out who he is. There's quite a reasonable argument in asserting > that a chance encounter was influential in Harry choosing sides. Well, Draco told Harry about the right and wrong kind of wizards with Ron Weasley standing next to Harry. That Harry met Ron, and that they got on well on the train, seemed more significant to me than that Harry had seen Draco previously. When Harry refused Draco's offer, I took it for a sign of Harry's loyalty for people he likes, not so much as rejection of Draco. But I agree about the Sorting Hat. Harry was sorted after Draco was already sorted into Slytherin, and of course Harry didn't want to be in the same house as this snobbish boy. Not after Minerva McGoganall had given them her rousing speech about their houses being their families. I find it somewhat hard to imagine that Harry didn't want to be in Slytherin, because he feared to become a DE or to be among prospective DEs. Despite Hagrid's explanation his picture about DEs can't have been more than fuzzy. > But not satisfied with that, Jo works it a third time - Snape. If that > first Potions lesson had gone differently - what? Being the sort of > teacher ole Sevvy is it's unlikely that Harry would ever actually like > him, but it probably wouldn't have degenerated into outright hate. Indeed, I've always thought that Snape set the pattern for their mutual antagonism that very first day. But I don't quite see how that pertains to your argument. Everybody is shaped by experiences and will ineract with others accordingly. That does not eliminate the ability to chose. > The choices made from now on really will show what he's made of. There are clues to that in all five books already. Harry does not sit passively around. His choices may be gut reactions most of the time, but they are choices nontheless. Highlighting, if nothing else, that he is not an analytical kind of person. Anna, still newbie From nrenka at yahoo.com Sun Nov 28 19:41:23 2004 From: nrenka at yahoo.com (nrenka) Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2004 19:41:23 -0000 Subject: What has Snape seen (Was Re: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118721 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" wrote: > Carol responds: > The only problem I have with Hannah's interpretation is that if > young Snape had actually performed a Cruciatus or other illegal > curse, it would have showed up in a Priori Incantatem on his wand > (if one was done, and I don't see why it wouldn't) and Crouch Sr. > would have sent him to Azkaban rather than believing Dumbledore > that Snape had reformed and was now a spy. We have no evidence that Snape himself ever went in front of a tribunal--all we see is Dumbledore intervening on his behalf. Perhaps DD had enough pull with the authorities at that point in time to pull such a thing off? > As cunning as Snape is, I think he could have managed to please, > and fool, Voldemort without actually performing any Unforgiveables > himself. But he may well have concocted undetectable poisons > (bottled Death?) as well as immortality potions. He might even > have learned to concot Veritaserum and the Wolfbane Potion in LV's > service, the latter as part of LV's attempt to recruit werewolves to > his side. Is there any evidence for this model? I seem to recall the main testifying figure to Snape's cunning being Sirius--and per some of your other arguments, Carol, that disqualifies his evidence immediately, as being after the fact and from a biased observer. Unless we're believing Sirius when he says something nice about Snape, and not when he doesn't? I find it very, very hard to swallow 19-year-old Snape cunning enough to fool Voldemort into, essentially, letting Snape do what he wants. It makes Voldemort out into an easily manipulated idiot, and for Snape-the-spy, begging off draws attention to himself. Any good spy has lots of times he'd have to get along to go along. Snape is cunning, yes, but cunning is always going to bend in the face of pure force. I note your argument that Voldemort's DEs had specialties, although this only comes to us through Karkaroff (who doesn't say, you might note, "Snape! Voldemort's Potions Master!"--while he does peg Mulciber as an Imperius caster). Again, per such incidents as the MoM, Lucius Malfoy isn't important enough, despite his essential contacts within government, to get out of doing it--why are we postulating a young but talented Snape able to talk his way out of the s***work? I can see Voldemort requiring DEs to do distasteful things as loyalty tests, and nuking the ones who refused (Regulus, perhaps). When Voldemort says "Hop!", the operative answer is "How high?", for a minion. > Snape, IMO, would have insinuated his way to the top, making sure > that LV knew his talents and put them to their best use. And the > best use for him would have been what only he could do, not what > many other supporters could do equally well. We're assuming an awful lot if we postulate that Voldemort had no one better at Potions than a fairly young man, or that Snape's skills are unique enough to keep him busy at home. It may well turn out to be true, but there're a ton of holes in it as it stands. > Above all, good as Dumbledore is at forgiving, would he have hired > Snape if he had actually Crucio'd or AK'd innocent people? Snape's > fascination with the Dark Arts does not necessarily translate into a > fascination with illegal and Unforgiveable Curses. He hired an ex-Death Eater, which Sirius was surprised at in and of itself. He keeps said person out of the DADA job because it would "bring out the worst in him". Dumbledore has an ideology of forgiveness where many others do not. Of course, one interview answer raised the possibility that Dumbledore doesn't *know* everything that Snape did, but I won't be so churlish as to speculate there. -Nora reminds everyone to be a good citizen: read downthread before posting, and snip your quoted material! From jlnbtr at yahoo.com Sun Nov 28 17:42:25 2004 From: jlnbtr at yahoo.com (Juli) Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2004 09:42:25 -0800 (PST) Subject: McGonagall in OOP. Was; Re: Too "Good" Harry / The resolution of Snape In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041128174226.54136.qmail@web53103.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 118722 Anna: > In defense of Minerva McGonagall: She supported Harry in a very underhanded way. Twice she offered him biscuits immediately after she berated him, and told him to not openly oppose the MoM. She tried to protect the students as best she could, with a better understanding of the threat Umbridge poses, than the kids have. Juli: I wasn't trying to put MM as an enemy, I mean, I really like the woman, she's so proper in everything she does, she cares for her students (all houses) and doesn't take BS from anyone, she's great. All I wanted to say is that she could try to make things easier for the kids, like some words of encouragment, just a simple Hold on, kids, DD will be back soon. Not too much so her position allowed her without becoming an even larger target than she already is. Juli From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sun Nov 28 19:51:26 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2004 19:51:26 -0000 Subject: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118723 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "dumbledore11214" wrote: > > > Carol: > > If you can present evidence of fear and loathing of the Dark Arts on > James's part at this point, other than Sirius's after the fact > attribution of that hatred to him,I will reconsider this position. > > Alla: > > I think the HINT of James already hating Dark Arts and especially > pureblood ideology IS there, namely his reaction to Snape calling > Lily a "Mudblood" > > "What?" yelped James. "I'd NEVER call you a - you- know what!" - > OOP, p.648. > > > Carol: > > But even if James did hate the Dark Arts, his treatment of Severus > in this scene is inexcusable bullying. > > > Alla: > > True, but I see no reason to exclude his hate of DA as ONE of the > reasons for such bullying. Carol notes: I'll concede that objection to the pureblood ideology (which may or may not be connected in James's mind to the Dark Arts) is one *possible* reason for the attack on Severus. But note that the attack *began* before Severus called Lily a "mudblood" and that she seemed surprised by his use of the word (despite his emotional state at the moment). I don't think we can assume an ideological basis for the bullying though James may have justified it in his own mind after the fact because of the insult to Lily. We really have no evidence that the Pensieve incident was anything other than unjustifiable bullying. It *may* have an underlying ideological basis, but we haven't seen it yet, and having a good reason for disliking Severus does not give James and Sirius the right to attack and humiliate him. Nor would he have the right to attack and humiliate either of them if the tables were turned. We really don't know what was going on in James's mind, but his air-headed behavior doesn't suggest any deep motivation at this point. Carol, apologizing for being unable to let the subject drop From annemehr at yahoo.com Sun Nov 28 20:10:21 2004 From: annemehr at yahoo.com (annemehr) Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2004 20:10:21 -0000 Subject: Another Flint? (Was: When?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118724 > Carol responds: > I agree that the passage describes the sensation--not so much > mind-numbing as blissfully happy and unaware of anything except that > feeling--rather than to the actual experience of being Imperio'd. I'm > wondering whether someone with a little more time on his or her hands > will present the three passages together for comparison (the Veelas, > the first Imperio by Crouch!Moody, and the Imperio by Voldemort). If > the sensation is virtually identical, then I would guess that's what > JKR meant by "for the third time in his life." Otherwise, I think it's > a Flint. > Speaking of Flints, has anyone wondered how the Dementors could bury > the polyjuiced Mrs. Crouch if they're blind? And I half-recall a > passage in GoF in which Hermione, who is usually right about such > things, refers to them as if they're able to see through an > invisibility cloak. (Can anyone find and quote that passage?) I wonder > if the blindness of the Dementors is something JKR attributed to them > late in the game, not realizing that OoP would contradict GoF. > > Carol, wondering how the Dementors would have recognized Sirius Black > if they can't see Annemehr: All right, here are the passages. Christelle has already quoted the Veela one, so I'll copy and paste: > In GOF, with the Veela: > "The Veela had started to dance, and Harry's mind had gone > completely and blissfully blank." (chap8, p94, UK version) >From ch. 15, in Crouch!Moody's class: "Harry felt a floating sensation as every thought and worry in his head was wiped gently away, leaving nothing but a vague, untraceable happiness." And again, from the graveyard, ch. 34: "And Harry felt, for the third time in his life, the sensation that his mind had been wiped of all thought..." So, a blank mind, wiped of all thought, it sounds like the same feeling to me. The fact that the cause was different the first time is beside the point. No FLINT, in my opinion. As for the dementor question, I don't see why blind dementors would have any trouble burying a body. I couldn't find the quote from Hermione you mentioned, although it certainly does sound familiar. Still, I just think that if she said "see," it wasn't to be taken literally, but that the Dementors have some way of sensing when someone is there (by their emotions?), and invisibility cloaks make no difference. There are other ways for humans to recognise that a person is near without seeing them: by hearing, scent, or feeling their step on the floor. Then there are bats which use sonar and vipers which see into the infrared. I imagine Dementors, who are so different from humans, have a different way of sensing people. More puzzling to me is the question in your tagline, about how the Dementors were supposed to find Sirius Black. There'd be no point in their searching for him if they couldn't pick him out of a crowd of people, if not by sight then by his own unique emotional pattern. But there's canon for thinking the dementors can not tell people apart: "The Dementors are blind. They sensed one healthy, one dying person entering Azkaban. They sensed one healthy, one dying person leaving it. My father smuggled me out, disguised as my mother, in case any prisoners were watching through their doors." -- Barty Crouch Jr., "Veritaserum" ch. 35. I can only postulate that being near death clouds a person's individuality to a dementor. Annemehr From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sun Nov 28 20:22:43 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2004 20:22:43 -0000 Subject: What has Snape seen (Was Re: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs) In-Reply-To: <41A93E7E.50805@telus.net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118725 Hannah wrote: > > As to what he's seen or done, in some ways I hope he's not done anything too awful, but OTOH I think it would be a bit lame if it turns out he just hid away at HQ with his nose in a cauldron the whole time. I reckon he'll have seen a lot of nasty things, and > > done at least a few himself. For instance, I can see him managing > > the Cruiciatius curse without too much difficulty, if it was on > > the 'right' person. > > > > Not sending Snape out to fight would be wasting a valuable resource for LV, IMO. All the signs point to him being pretty handy in a duel, especially where he'd have the upper hand to start with. > > There's the quick reactions, the ability to keep his cool (at least in certain situations), his mastery of plenty of hexes... No, he'd have been there at various muggle killings and Order fights, maybe as Lucius' right hand man. Even once he'd turned spy he'd still > > have had to participate when required in order to maintain his cover. > > > Kathy responded: > I think you have a lot of good points. I do wonder about his value to V as a fighter, however. This is not expressed very well in the books. He knows a lot of spells and hexes, he has several important skills, Legilimency and occlumency, he is capable with defense, using expelliarmus on Lockhart, and using a spell that cut James face in the pensieve scene. For the most part though, and this has been brought up by other posters, Snape,warns, threatens, tries to intimidate, but almost never takes direct action. In the stand-off with Sirius, he was waiting for Sirius to make the first move. The only indication of his power level is in SS when he attempts to control the broom wandless. He is fighting against both Quirrel and V. and holding his own. He was not the smartest student at Hogwarts, much as it pains me to say this, James and Sirius were considered to be the brightest. He is not described as tall in the books, (Sirius is taller) and he is thin. He has only two real claims to fame. 1) he is a Potion's Master and 2) he is a logical thinker. > > He appears to have some very strong inhibitions against actual physical or magical violence rather than the enjoyment needed to be a truly > successful DE. He threatened Harry in the Shrieking shack several times, > threatened Sirius at least once. This did have some effect, so Sirius > obviously believes him to be capable. He got chewed on by Fluffy, and > knocked out by Harry. The most he has done in the books as an adult was give Harry a good shove and perhaps, deliberately or accidentally > explode a jar of cockroaches. I am not convinced that he is still spying. > > I suspect he would have chosen to remain in a position making use of his specialty and enjoying the status that he would have gained from that rather than risking himself on murdering muggles and fighting aurors. It doesn't even tell us in the books that he was killing flies, or stunning flies, or if it was even him in his memories. If he was a smart man, and Slytherin, don't forget, he'd have stuck his nose well into a cauldron and tried very hard to leave it there while eavesdropping diligently. Carol responds to both posts: We do know that Snape is highly intelligent, as even the narrator, expressing Harry's POV concedes: "Putting two and two together as only Snape could. It was Snape who suspected Quirrell in SS/PS and his suspicions of Lupin in PoA were not wholly unfounded. He can perform some powerful spells (e.g., Legilimency), he's a superb Occlumens and potion maker, he can do silent magic (waving his wand without speaking the spell to put potions ingredients on the board or clean up a spill), he conjured up four stretchers in PoA and floated the stretchers back to Hogwarts. The detailed answers on his DADA exam are strong evidence that he was well-versed in that subject at fifteen or sixteen (end of fifth year). It's true that we haven't yet seen what he's capable of doing, but I'll be surprised if he isn't a very powerful wizard in his own right. I think he *could* cast a Cruciatus Curse or an Imperio or an AK but has chosen not to do so. As you say, he threatens but doesn't follow through with his threats, mostly because he doesn't have to but also because he seems to prefer psychological punishment to physical punishment. The fact that he doesn't kill Sirius is no indication that he could not have done so, just as he refuses to use magic to punish students, unlike Crouch!Moody and Umbridge. This preference may well be a matter of principle or self-control. I don't think it's an indication of his inability to use such magic. And again, I think he could hold his own in a duel or a battle using a great variety of hexes and curses without resorting to illegal curses. BTW, we do know that the teenage boy stunning flies is Snape. Harry recognizes him, as he does not recognize the hook-nosed man in the scene with the angry father. I've already stated that I think LV would have recognized Snape's value as a potion maker and capitalized on that, but I doubt very much that he knew about Snape's talents as an Occlumens. The whole point of having that talent or skill is to conceal it. So I agree that LV would have put him to what he considered to be the best use, primarily making potions that none of the other DEs could concoct. We haven't really seen what Snape can do because, on principle or for self-preservation, he holds back from using magical punishments on children or adults. Carol, wishing she knew the answers to all the Snape questions From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com Sun Nov 28 20:36:28 2004 From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (arrowsmithbt) Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2004 20:36:28 -0000 Subject: Choosing sides In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118726 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "anna_ktrn" wrote: > > Whyever not? What sets Harry apart from other Muggle-borns who manage just > fine? I see no indication anywhere that a rotten childhood in the Muggle > world is a prerequisite to love Hogwarts. > Kneasy: Loving Hogwarts is not what it's about so far as Harry is concerned. He's a one off, whether he likes it or not. He's special. He's Weapon!Harry. Coping with Voldy and his friends is what Harry has to learn to deal with. > > Not all of Hogwarts's Muggle-born students are as socially awkward, as > Hermione used to be. She switched worlds because she got the letter, and > realized that she is a witch. What more reasons do any of the Muggle-borns > have? > Kneasy: Quite a lot, I'd imagine. Put yourself in the place of one of the parents of these children. Out of the blue you're informed that your darling offspring has been accepted for a totally unknown school that you know nothing about, cannot visit, requires textbooks covering subjects that folk used to be burned at the stake for studying, offers no known qualification and with no career structure at the end of it. To the average Muggle, what is so wonderful about being a witch or a wizard? Why should they even believe that they actually exist? If you received a letter from the Head Dolally of Piglump School of Sourcery and Spells would you happily pack your child's suitcase and send them off rejoicing? I doubt it. We accept it of course, but we've been let into the secret. We don't see a problem. But how many parents would take chances like that where their children are concerned? > Indeed, I've always thought that Snape set the pattern for their mutual > antagonism that very first day. But I don't quite see how that pertains to > your argument. Everybody is shaped by experiences and will ineract with > others accordingly. That does not eliminate the ability to chose. > Kneasy: Indeed not. But again that wasn't my point, the ability to choose is largely inbuilt into almost everyone. It's how and why we make the choices we do that is of interest. A fair proportion of posters maintain that Harry has made his choices because he is innately good and anti-evil. My contention is that though this may indeed be true, it is not the rationale behind his choices so far. He stands where he is because (largely) of where the people he likes or dislikes stand. As you say, he is not analytical. But from now on more analysis will be needed from Harry; gut reactions will not be enough; gut reactions resulted in the death of Sirius. He needs to consider the possible consequences of his actions from now on. It's gonna get very fraught out there. From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sun Nov 28 20:37:28 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2004 20:37:28 -0000 Subject: dark magic was Re: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118727 Potioncat wrote: > > In CoS Hermione suggests they use the polyjuice potion that Snape > talked about in class. Neither Harry or Ron remember Snape even > mentioning it. They trick Lockhart into giving them permission to > check the book out of the restricted section. Hermione says the > book has lots of dark arts in it. (Am beginning to worry about > movie contamination for that last part.) > > In OoP Harry thinks that he did well on the question about the > effects of polyjuice potion because he used it himself. > > But remember, the kids learn about defending against dark arts, so > the potion could be a dark art...Snape did not have them make it in > class that we know of. He does know in GoF that someone is stealing > supplies that would create polyjuice potion. > > I'm just not sure that the WW isn't as confused about ethics as we > in the RW are. And I'm not sure everyone draws the line at the same > point of "dark". Carol notes: Since the Dark Arts aren't taught at Hogwarts but Snape mentions the potion to a second-year class and has the ingredients in his supply cupboard, I would venture to guess that it's taught to his NEWT potions students, who have evidently learned the *theory* of the potion for their OWLs. (And wasn't it the Potions OWL rather than the DADA OWL where this question came up?) I don't think polyjuice is Dark Magic or Hermione would not have suggested that they use it in CoS--though, like most magic, the potion can be put to evil uses (Crouch!Moody). Just my opinion, of course. I agree that the definition of "Dark" is very shadowy so far. Carol, wondering what's happened to Karkaroff, who taught Dark Magic to his students From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Sun Nov 28 20:40:10 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2004 20:40:10 -0000 Subject: Problem with OotP? (was: Pampering) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118728 Renee wrote: "In a fairy tale you can have a bunch of easily identifiable, no-good kids who show their true colours at the age of eleven. In a more realistic story, an element like this is somewhat disturbing; it smacks of predestination. Nor can it be countered by having one or two 'good' Slytherin students - unless these can act successfully as advocates of the true values of their house (as opposed to all the Pureblood nonsense) and effect a change in attitude towards their house in general. Maybe that's what the Sorting Hat's new song is pointing to. I do hope Book 6 will undermine the idea that one out of four kids chooses to be a potential terrorist at the age of 11." Del replies : I completely agree. I was particularly dismayed in OoP when not a single Slytherin became a DA. That points only to 2 possibilities as far as I can see : - Students from Gryffindor, Ravenclaw and Hufflepuff don't associate with the Slytherins. Or at least, those students that became DA don't associate with Slytherins. - Some of the DA associate with some Slytherins but those DA members didn't deem those Slytherins trustworthy enough to tell them about the DA. In either case, it implies that Slytherin is indeed an evil House out of which no good can come. Needless to say, I don't like it. And I REALLY hope a good Slytherin will integrate Harry's circle in HBP (not necessarily the inner circle -the Group of 6-, but the DA for example). Del From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sun Nov 28 21:18:26 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2004 21:18:26 -0000 Subject: Peter In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118729 Catlady wrote: > > << 4. [Peter] found Voldemort in Albania without help. >> > > If Peter already had the Dark Mark, perhaps it led him there. imagine. Carol responds: Although we can't be certain, I think the Dark Mark on Peter's arm that LV touches to summon the DEs to the graveyard is red and painful because it's new. Being a spy and traitor before Godric's Holow doesn't make him a DE at that time. It would certainly be easier to lie to Dumbledore and his friends if he wasn't one, and guilty thoughts about his Dark Mark would be hard to hide from a Legilimens. In any case, Snape's and Karkaroff's Dark Marks didn't start darkening until after Peter had found Voldemort and helped him assume a shape as Babymort, so I don't think it was his Dark Mark that led him to LV. Unlike the other DEs (and the ex-DE Snape), he was motivated to find Voldemort. He also had the important advantage of being an animagus: he could converse with other small animals along the way and hear their tales of terror about animals that had been possessed and killed. By following the latest rumors, he could find where Voldemort was rumored to be. He could also spy on wizards in his animagus form to see if the same rumors were circulating among humans. I don't know whether Peter's finding Voldemort says anything about his powers as a wizard, other than the ability to turn into a rat, but it does seem to suggest a level of intelligence (or cunning) beyond what he's usually credited with, the ability to use his animagus ability to accomplish his own ends--the same ability we see when he vanishes into the sewers after blowing up the Muggle street. Carol From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Sun Nov 28 21:28:49 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2004 21:28:49 -0000 Subject: Spy novel? maybe (was Lupin's secrets ) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118730 Nora wrote : "Dumbledore says, near the end of CoS, "It is our choices that show what we truly are, far more than our abilities." Show. Not determine. Which is not to wholly invalidate the point made above and the subject being discussed, but to point out that, perhaps, JKR's cosmology is a little more essentialist than one might like. Showing what we are speaks to there being something there that we actually *are*, deep down inside (an essence, if you will), and that this fundamental aspect of our being is revealed more through our choices than our abilities. The focus here on revelation rather than self-shaping seems to point to there being something fixed within people-- which, like it or not, seems to fit with her statements that Tom Riddle never loved anyone." Del replies : Agreed. I used to misunderstand this statement, and as a consequence I had troubles reconciling it with some other elements in the books, mainly the obvious early "evilness" of people like Tom Riddle, Severus Snape and Draco Malfoy (and the rest of the Slytherin kids apparently). When I understood what DD really said, I realised that some people in the Potterverse may indeed be more inherently evil than others. It explains how Tom Riddle could be so screwed up at the age of 11, or why JKR doesn't seem to have any remorse beating on Draco by not letting him grow up or giving him a chance to make a real life-changing choice. We haven't seen Draco have any potentially eye-opening experience, and yet he is still expected to grow up and see the light, and being punished for failing to do so. But what I can't reconcile any more now, is when JKR says that she believes nobody was born evil. Unless she means it like I saw it explained about psychopaths : that they are the result of a catastrophic mixture of bad nature, bad nurture and unfortunate circumstances ? Del From nkafkafi at yahoo.com Sun Nov 28 22:06:16 2004 From: nkafkafi at yahoo.com (nkafkafi) Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2004 22:06:16 -0000 Subject: W6 - a low-grade essay about weapons of wizard war In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118731 "kizor0" wrote: > > This is a pretty short thing. I have intentions of expanding and > refining it later. I'll post the later versions here, unless enough > people tell me not to. Got your own suggestions or ideas? Please tell > them. > > Wondrous and Wicked Ways of Waging Wizarding War > Neri: An interesting research. Thanks to Alla for noticing it (I've long gave up the attempt to read even most of HPfGU posts). > The Premise > > It's quite clear that the war will not be a military campaign in the > Muggle sense of the word. Even if the wizarding world was unconcerned > with revealing itself, it'd still lack the required numbers. The Order > of the Phoenix was operating with less than twenty-five people during > the first war. Guerrilla war and small precision strikes will be the > order of the day, then, instead of a `grab a rifle and go get shot' > grinder. Neri: Very good points. I'd add two more reasons why war in the WW is very different than muggle war: 1. The ability to effectively use non-lethal weapons (curses other than the Avada Kedavra, the Imperius curse), and in fact accurately control the degree of lethality/non-lethality, means that there is much less need to employ the "bigger gun" and "all out war" approaches, which is one reason why muggle wars frequently escalate out of all intended proportions (the "we'll finish this and be back home by Christmass" syndrome, which typically ends up with a several years war and a monstrous butcher's bill). 2. In the WW fighting ability is directly proportional to one's magical power. The leaders are usually the most powerful wizards (in our case LV and DD, both over 70 yrs old), and they are also the most powerful fighters. This means that they don't need large military organizations and a dedicated class of professional soldiers to carry out their missions for them. In this situation the conflicts are largely kept on the personal level, and duels and assassinations are much more probable than large-scale war. > The strongest point about the non-existence of aides is the battle in > the Department of Mysteries, a genuine magical battle that only used > wands. My feeble defence is that two of the three groups involved > scrambled immediately, as in every second counts, while the Death > Eaters were going against a group of young teenagers with the > advantage of surprise and two-on-one numbers. Why should they have > armed themselves for definite overkill? Neri: I think it is an excellent defense. In fact, the DEs probably weren't waiting even for 6 children. More likely they were waiting for Harry alone or the Trio at most. I'd also add that we have the duel between DD and Voldy as an example of a really high level battle, but again both sides didn't plan it in advance. > - Defensive drones: While no magical means can stop an Avada Kedavra, > the spell has been absorbed by another object on a number of > occasions. Drones that stay close to the user and throw themselves to > the path of incoming curses could be a tremendous asset. Neri: As the statues from the Fountain of Magical Brethren demonstrate, although I'd call them robots rather than drones. At the time when The Battle On Hogwarts finally ensues, I fully expect the suits of armor to rise and defend the castle. > - Intel drones: Stick a piece of the kind of mirror-glass Sirius used > on a drone, or install sensor-equivalents and a transmitter using > whatever the Wizarding Radio Network does, and voila! You have a scout > or a sentinel. Neri: I suspect this is high-tech way of thinking rather than magical way of thinking. As demonstrated by DD (using the statues and the portraits) and Voldy (using possessed Nagini) there are kinds of magic that can endow inanimate objects or animals with the ability of being either autonomous agents or effective remote control devices. Even emotions can be crystallized into powerful protective agents with a degree of autonomy (the patronus). There is some indication the DD uses his patronus not only for defense but also communication: in GoF he sends a "silvery bird" from his wand to call Hagrid from his hut, and JKR lately said that DD's patronus is a phoenix. I wonder if it is possible to use one's patronus to gather intelligence too. Also, since owls clearly have the magical ability to locate the addressee anywhere, I wonder about using owls to deliver the equivalent of a letter bomb (demonstrated by the Rita Skeeter's reader who sent Hermione a letter with bubotubber pus in it). > > The Uses of Near-Instantaneous Travel > Apparating for short distances and Portkeys for long ones allow travel > with neglible delay. Presumably it's still a second or few, making the > methods unusable in battle (otherwise, I for one would not have barged > to the Death Room through a door but Apparated two feet above Lucius > Malfoy's head with steel boots) with the possible exception of > fleeing. Neri: I think you are still ignoring the DD vs. LV duel, in which short-range apparating was effectively used by both sides. However, it seems that this ability is unique to the most powerful wizards. There is much that we don't know about apparating. In 12GP Fred and George apparate into Ron's and Harry's room and mistakenly appear on Ron's knees instead of on the bed. Their excuse was that "it's more difficult in the dark", but I'm sure they apparated into this room many times before. Apparating into a room you never been in before, exactly above one's head when you don't know where exactly in the room he is, this is probably much more difficult. > Give Order operatives a set of a few Portkeys to Grimmauld Place and > other strategic locations The fact > against this is the low number of Order members present at the > Department of Mysteries. No Snape, no Weasleys. > Neri: Yes, I've complained here in the past on the very poor communication abilities of the Order. > > Command Centers > The wizarding world has the means to make a center of operations at > least as advanced as the Muggle world. As the Weasley's wonderful > watches show, items can be made to show a faraway person's status > without delay. We don't know how hard it was to make the > Marauder's Map and how much did the makers have to know about > Hogwarts, but having a Phoenix's Parchment of at least some important > locations sounds likely. Neri: Add also that the Ministry must be operating some sort of "magical radar" that immediately locates underage magic. However, we don't know how easy it is to block or fool all these devices. I'm sure the Ministry "radar" is easily blocked by any accomplished wizard who knows what he's doing, since the Order's advance guard didn't have any qualms of doing magic in the Dursleys house. This means the radar is efficient against underages, but not against the big shots. > If contact lenses are too small, well, that brings a rather unpleasant > mental image of Order members tearing one of their own eyes out and > replacing them with their own versions of Moody's. Having a > freaky-looking face beats being a good-looking corpse. With wizard > medicine, it's very likely that the eyes could be preserved and rather > replaced anyhow. Neri: I don't think there's need to resort to such measures. I'm personally sure that DD's half-moon glasses work similarly to Moody's eye. In CoS DD demonstrated his ability to detect Harry and Ron under the invisibility cloak in Hagrid's hut. > > Space-warping > As cauldrons, cars and tents show, an object's size is no indication > of the volume of space it holds. This removes much of the restrictions > the size and weight of wargear places, and offers the chance of > high-risk infiltration missions ? if the effects are strong enough, > one person can carry many in concealment. > Neri: Hmm. About that scenario of sending LV a letter bomb by owl, why not send him the whole Order with DD included, tightly packed inside a space-warped package? Does anybody know if the space wrapping magic also breaks the mass conservation law? > Wizards may have some kind of spell that > makes Muggle projectile weapons infeasible Neri: I expect some kind of a shield, probably a close relative of the banishment charm. > a few flashbangs (concussion grenades; temporarily blind and deafen > the enemy while causing no permanent damage) in the DoM would have > been a great asset. Neri: Fred and George's fireworks could do that. Come to think about it, these fireworks also have some drone capabilities and built-in defenses again common curses. BTW I have high hopes of many of your ideas will actually be employed by the Weasley Wizarding Weezies, who will be secretly manufacturing weapons for the Order. > Operation: Human Shield > How's this for vile? The Death Eaters attack a disco, school or other > suitable establishment and Imperio the large amounts of children or > adolescents there, then pass out AK-47s. Neri: The Imperius curse might be employed in a much more vile and effective way. See http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/92918 and following thread for details. Neri From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sun Nov 28 22:22:45 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2004 22:22:45 -0000 Subject: Snape and Dumbledore [was Spy novel?] In-Reply-To: <20041128171158.59993.qmail@web53104.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118732 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Magda Grantwich wrote: > --- Hannah wrote: > > > This theory would back up a lot of what Carol said in her post; > > Snape's first chance, him *re*joining the good side, the likelihood > > that DD had strong influence over him at school, how he managed to > > get away with going back to LV after being revealed as a spy, and > > why DD was able to decide to trust him. > > > Without coming down on one side or the other of your theory/plot > (although personally I can buy it and think it's quite likely what > actually happened), there is an additional piece of evidence for > Dumbledore having some influence on teen!Snape. > > In the Shrieking Shack in POA, Lupin relates the story of the Prank > and then says that Snape "was forbidden to tell anyone by > Dumbledore". > > This puzzles me. Had parents found out that Dumbledore had let a > werewolf into the school as a student he very likely would have lost > his position and Lupin would have been expelled at a minimum. So > what possible leverage did Dumbledore have over Snape that would have > prevented him from telling anyone? If anything Snape was the one who > was in the driver's seat and in a position to exact some kind of > payment for his conditional silence. > > "Severus, I forbid you to blackmail me" is pretty much what it > amounts to. > > Magda Carol responds: "Forbidden" seems strangely strong, doesn't it, not to mention out of character for Dumbledore. It would have been more in character for Dumbledore to put Severus on his honor not to tell, a first chance to show that he was worthy of Dumbledore's trust. I think, too, that Severus understood that he would buy the disgrace of Remus and Sirius at the expense of Dumbledore, and that he himself would look like a weakling who had to be rescued. The only person who would come out of the fiasco would be the supposedly heroic James. I doubt that Severus wanted the whole WW to know that he owed his life to his worst enemy, whether or not it involved the binding magical contract that we've been calling a life debt. Dumbledore must have used psychology rather than threats. That's his standard modus operandi, and I don't think he would have abandoned it in this case. Maybe there was a bargain involved, too--I'll teach you Occlumency if you remain silent? Carol, who thinks it's a near miracle that Severus kept that secret for some twenty years, especially given that he thought Remus was part of the plot to kill him From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Sun Nov 28 22:36:55 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2004 22:36:55 -0000 Subject: Choosing sides In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118733 Anna wrote : " Whyever not? What sets Harry apart from other Muggle-borns who manage just fine? I see no indication anywhere that a rotten childhood in the Muggle world is a prerequisite to love Hogwarts. " Kneasy answered : "Loving Hogwarts is not what it's about so far as Harry is concerned. He's a one off, whether he likes it or not. He's special. He's Weapon!Harry. Coping with Voldy and his friends is what Harry has to learn to deal with." Del replies : Agreed. Let's imagine for a moment that the situation was as Kneasy previously described it, with Harry totally happy with the Dursleys. Upon receiving his Hogwarts letter (at the latest), he would have learned that LV killed his parents (and grandparents ?), and he would have been urged not to go to Hogwarts. Let's say he went. He then would have learned that he is a hero. It's not so huge a supposition to imagine that he would not have known how to deal with that. Most probably one of two outcomes would have happened : either his head would have inflated to unhealthy proportions, or he would have felt crushed by it. Real Harry survived it because the Dursleys had ingrained in him that he was a nobody and at the same time he had managed to retain a strong enough sense of self-worth -the perfect combination to handle such a situation. Even if he did manage to deal with his fame, there would still have been the little matter of LV. Real Harry is bent on thwarting LV's plans because LV ruined his childhood by killing his parents. But a Harry who would have been happy with his foster parents might have been less bothered about this. I'm not saying he wouldn't have been bothered at all, but I don't see that he would necessarily have been more bothered than many other kids who suffered because of VWI, like Neville or Susan Bones for example. Of course, there would also have been the matter of not risking doing anything that might make his foster parents unhappy, like getting killed. Hermione and Ron don't think to mind much about that, but this is rather strange to me. All of this would not exactly have prepared him for the revelation of the Prophecy : die or kill (apparently). The danger of his dropping out any time would have been quite great, but nowhere greater than in OoP. After all, one reason Harry hasn't jumped off the boat yet is that he has nowhere to go. If he did have a loving home to go to (a home where he is *protected* against LV), and a satisfying alternate life to fall back on, it isn't so sure that he would choose the fighting life. Anna wrote : " Not all of Hogwarts's Muggle-born students are as socially awkward, as Hermione used to be. She switched worlds because she got the letter, and realized that she is a witch. What more reasons do any of the Muggle-borns have?" Kneasy answered : "Quite a lot, I'd imagine. (snip) To the average Muggle, what is so wonderful about being a witch or a wizard? Why should they even believe that they actually exist? If you received a letter from the Head Dolally of Piglump School of Sourcery and Spells would you happily pack your child's suitcase and send them off rejoicing? I doubt it. We accept it of course, but we've been let into the secret. We don't see a problem. But how many parents would take chances like that where their children are concerned?" Del replies : I commented on this a few weeks ago. Many people seem to assume that Muggle-borns are necessarily happy to discover that they are wizards and witches, and that they all choose to go to Hogwarts. But the fact is : we don't know how many Muggleborns who receive the letter actually come to Hogwarts. Most of all, we don't know *why* they decide to come to Hogwarts. And we don't know why their parents let them come. Del From nrenka at yahoo.com Sun Nov 28 22:48:21 2004 From: nrenka at yahoo.com (nrenka) Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2004 22:48:21 -0000 Subject: Choosing sides In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118734 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "delwynmarch" wrote: > Del: > I commented on this a few weeks ago. > Many people seem to assume that Muggle-borns are necessarily happy > to discover that they are wizards and witches, and that they all > choose to go to Hogwarts. But the fact is : we don't know how many > Muggleborns who receive the letter actually come to Hogwarts. Most > of all, we don't know *why* they decide to come to Hogwarts. And we > don't know why their parents let them come. We are told, fairly early on, that lots of odd things have happened to young Harry--his hair fixing itself, some seeming teleportation, etc. Not too much of a stretch to assume that strange magical things happen with other kids. Combine that with parents who actually observe what is going on with their offspring instead of carrying out a regimen of neglect and the fact that a teacher comes to talk to them about Hogwarts (per interview--I forget where, though), and you have a more powerful rationale for letting the kids go off. It's obvious that they can do things the normal kids can't, things that are, well, magical: that may play a large role in letting them go, the realization that your child is talented and will only learn how to use it at one place. ...with the possible added bonus that things could get hairy if you don't. Wouldn't shock me if at least some Muggleborns' magic manifested itself in messy and costly ways on things like the family china. :) I doubt either parents or students really fully understand all of the costs, but then again, we also don't know how disbarred from the normal Muggle world the Muggleborn who has finished school really and truly is. We lack the information to judge that question, so I won't speculate. Neither world is either a utopia or a true dystopia, though. -Nora gets back to her own personal dystopia of working From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Sun Nov 28 22:50:03 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2004 22:50:03 -0000 Subject: Choosing sides In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118735 Anna wrote : "Well, Draco told Harry about the right and wrong kind of wizards with Ron Weasley standing next to Harry. That Harry met Ron, and that they got on well on the train, seemed more significant to me than that Harry had seen Draco previously. When Harry refused Draco's offer, I took it for a sign of Harry's loyalty for people he likes, not so much as rejection of Draco." Del replies : I disagree, for one simple reason : if Harry had made friends with Draco that day in Madam Malkins', he might never have met Ron to start with. Draco would have been the one helping him onto Platform 9 3/4, and they would have shared a compartment. Harry might have realised after a while that he doesn't enjoy Draco's friendship so much, but he might have been in Slytherin House by that time. Too late to make friends with Gryffindor Ron. Anna wrote : " Everybody is shaped by experiences and will ineract with others accordingly. That does not eliminate the ability to chose. The choices made from now on really will show what he's made of. There are clues to that in all five books already. Harry does not sit passively around. His choices may be gut reactions most of the time, but they are choices nontheless. Highlighting, if nothing else, that he is not an analytical kind of person. " Del replies : But does he truly choose, or does he just react in a pre-programmed way? For example, did he choose not to go to Slytherin, or did he just react to the concepts of purebloods and evil ? Was it really a choice when Harry didn't take time to look for the *good* sides of Slytherin House ? The Hat tried to tell him that he would do good in Slytherin, that Slytherin would help him on his way to greatness, but Harry was so bent on his refusal that he didn't stop to listen and make an *educated* choice. Harry often tends to make decisions based on a *limited* number of elements. Slytherin is racist and breeds more evil wizards than other Houses ? Evil, I won't go there. I had a dream that Sirius is being tortured at the DoM and my previous dream was right ? I'm going. Even when people try to present him with counter-arguments, he doesn't listen. I don't call that making real choices : I call that jumping to conclusions. Del From meriaugust at yahoo.com Sun Nov 28 23:04:40 2004 From: meriaugust at yahoo.com (meriaugust) Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2004 23:04:40 -0000 Subject: Another Flint? (Was: When?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118736 Carol: > Speaking of Flints, has anyone wondered how the Dementors could bury > the polyjuiced Mrs. Crouch if they're blind? And I half-recall a > passage in GoF in which Hermione, who is usually right about such > things, refers to them as if they're able to see through an > invisibility cloak. (Can anyone find and quote that passage?) Meri now: Can't quote the passage because I haven't got my books on hand, but I believe what you're refering to is actually Professor Dumbledore's speech at the beginning of PoA. During the welcome feast he reminds the students (namely Harry) that dementors will be guarding the entrance ways to the grounds and that Invisibility Cloaks won't protect a person from them. I do in fact think that they are blind, but I also assume that they have other senses or abilities that make up for the lack of sight. After all, blind people in the real world generally have exceptional hearing or senses of smell and function reasonably normally, so the dementors could also function without sight but with the aid of some other sense that helps them locate people/objects. Meri - giving anything to know what the heck made the dementors... From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sun Nov 28 23:08:01 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2004 23:08:01 -0000 Subject: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118737 Carol earlier: > Statements like "Snape was clearly unpopular" are clearly the > narrator's interpretation of the scene, which reflects Harry's. The > actions and words can, IMO, be regarded as objective truth within > the context of the books, but interpretive statements should be > taken with a grain of salt. We are not inside the heads of any of > the characters in the memory and can only speculate as to their > motives, but there's nothing "fuzzy" about the action and the > dialogue in themselves--or the fuzziness comes from what Harry > doesn't see or the narrator doesn't record, in addition to the > interpretive statements previously mentioned. > > > > Alla responded: > > True, I guess - interpretive statements should be taken with grain > of salt, but I would argue that in this case the narrator makes the > MOST reasonable interpretation. > > "Students all around had turned to watch. Some of them had gotten to > their feet and were edging nearer to watch. Some looked > apprehensive, others entertained. > > .... > > Several people watching laughed." - OOP, paperback, p.646. > > > So, at least some people clearly ENJOYED Snape's misery. Their > ACTIONS showed that. Why? I don't know, but I sure want to know. > > So, what other interpretation will be more objective, in your > opinion? Carol responds: How about no interpretation at all, i.e., the elimination of the editorial commentary, such as "Snape was clearly unpopular"? "Several people" actually connotes a very small number, maybe half a dozen. So only a few people, including Sirius and Peter but not Remus, actually laughed. The onlookers are divided between those who look apprehensive and those who appear to be entertained. (The narrator is reporting Harry's impressions, based on facial expressions.) The words "some" and "others" give clear no indication of how many were in each group, but the reaction could well be evenly divided. It's possible that Severus didn't have many friends (the Slytherin gang was evidently no longer there or much reduced), but that doesn't mean he was actively disliked by half the school. At any rate, I think it's best to let readers arrive at their own conclusions. The narrator has been wrong before; I distrust "clearly" as much as I distrust "seemed," "appeared," and "knew." Harry's perspective adds color, but it can't always be trusted. And no, I'm not advocating any conspiracy theories, just talking once again about narrative technique. Carol From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sun Nov 28 23:34:38 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2004 23:34:38 -0000 Subject: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118738 Carol earlier: > >The statement that James always hated the Dark Arts comes from Sirius,twenty years after the Pensieve incident. As I've said before, he may be *orojecting* his own feelings, or James's *later* feelings, onto James at this time. We don't hear James himself speaking on the subject. > > Alla: > > I think Nora made a marvelous argument on why "it does not have to > be personal for James in order for him to hate Dark Arts". Carol responds: I read Nora's argument and understand her perspective, but even if she's right that the Dark Arts, the pureblood ideology, and Voldemort go together, there's no evidence that *James* was thinking in those terms at this time, or that he assoiciated Severus and Slytherin with the mindset that Nora calls "fascist." > > Carol earlier: > He [James] doesn't strike me as a guerilla in the war against Voldemort or any kind of hero at this point. It took, IMO, something drastic--perhaps the murder of his parents by DEs--to transform Pensieve James into the James of Godric's Hollow. > > > Alla: > > We differ on this one. Carol responds: Any particular reason why? Surely this is not the same James we hear calling to Lily that he'll hold off Voldemort while she takes Harry and runs? The James who died trying to fight for his family is admirable and courageous. The James who bullied Severus for the entertainment of his bored friend is arrogant and egotistical. James did a lot of growing up, IMO, in the years between the Pensieve incident and Godric's Hollow. > > Carol earlier: > > > It appears that you're taking Sirius's statement about James's > hatred of the Dark Arts at face value. I think that Sirius is not a > reliable source of information on the subject. He's too close to > James, after twelve years in Azkaban brooding on his wrongs and only > two years to partially recover in the horrible Black mansion, to be > an objective witness. IMO, we need confirmation from a more reliable > source in order to regard that statement as a canonical description > of James's views when he was fifteen. > > > > Alla: > > Yes, I do. I said that earlier - we DON'T KNOW how objective witness > ANY of the characters is at this point, except Voldemort,w ho had > been caught lying and Dumbledore, who we KNOW from JKR withholds > information. > > IF I will doubt ANY character's testimony, I will not be able to > support ANY of my arguments with canon's testimony. > > Untill Sirius is PROVEN to be a liar, I will take his testimony > seriously, I see no reason not to. > > I even take his testimony about Snape to be true, but I understand > why others may not want to, but not to take his words about James as > truthful? I see absolutely no reason why. Carol responds: For the record, I wasn't calling Sirius a liar. We all interpret events and other people's motives from our own perspective and see the past through the filter of the present. So I think Sirius is dating James's opposition to the Dark Arts to an earlier period than is likely, in part because James was later a strong opponent of Voldemort and in part because Sirius himself hated the Dark Arts from an early age because of his family. I think he believes that his feelings and James's feelings were more similar than they really were. I also think that Sirius *hated* Severus, whereas James's feelings toward him were more impersonal. I don't think he even really saw him as a person, much less the symbol of an ideology that James opposed. There is just no evidence that James cares about anything beyond popularity, Quidditch, having a good time, and Lily. He's a typical "jock," as we would call him in the U.S., an athlete who happens to be popular. He's also smart, but takes care not to be seen with his nose in a book. And there's no indication that anything terrible has yet happened in his young life to stir him up and start him thinking about serious issues like VW1. Hogwarts is a haven, and the students there live a sheltered life without even knowing it--as James will learn later when he starts losing friends and family and the Order members are picked off one by one. Carol, who really, really wants this to be her last post on this thread From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Sun Nov 28 23:41:51 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2004 23:41:51 -0000 Subject: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118739 > Carol responds: How about no interpretation at all, i.e., the elimination of the editorial commentary, such as "Snape was clearly unpopular"? "Several people" actually connotes a very small number, maybe half a dozen. So only a few people, including Sirius and Peter but not Remus, actually laughed. The onlookers are divided between those who look apprehensive and those who appear to be entertained. (The narrator is reporting Harry's impressions, based on facial expressions.) The words "some" and "others" give clear no indication of how many were in each group, but the reaction could well be evenly divided. It's possible that Severus didn't have many friends (the Slytherin gang was evidently no longer there or much reduced), but that doesn't mean he was actively disliked by half the school. At any rate, I think it's best to let readers arrive at their own conclusions. Alla: Ummm, no interpretation at all would have been more objective reading, sure, BUT we are stuck with this type of narrator and I was saying that for the narrator who makes conclusions and interprets things, this one was pretty good interpretation, IMO. Snape may have been disliked by the half of the school, OR NOT. All I am saying that it is reasonable to interpret that scene as if he was. From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Sun Nov 28 23:52:07 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2004 23:52:07 -0000 Subject: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118740 > Carol responds: I read Nora's argument and understand her perspective, but even if she's right that the Dark Arts, the pureblood ideology, and Voldemort go together, there's no evidence that *James* was thinking in those terms at this time, or that he assoiciated Severus and Slytherin with the mindset that Nora calls "fascist." Alla: I already said before that to me no evidence does not equal "no such evidence exist". Stranger things seem to appear out of nowhere (or it seemed so) in the books (Scabbers is the best example) and here we actually have the hint that James clearly disliked pureblood ideology. > Carol earlier: He [James] doesn't strike me as a guerilla in the war against Voldemort or any kind of hero at this point. It took, IMO, something drastic--perhaps the murder of his parents by DEs--to transform Pensieve James into the James of Godric's Hollow. > > Alla: > > > > We differ on this one. > > Carol responds: > Any particular reason why? Surely this is not the same James we hear calling to Lily that he'll hold off Voldemort while she takes Harry and runs? The James who died trying to fight for his family is admirable and courageous. The James who bullied Severus for the entertainment of his bored friend is arrogant and egotistical. James did a lot of growing up, IMO, in the years between the Pensieve incident and Godric's Hollow. Alla: Why do we differ? Because IMO we have A LOT of blank spots in the "James Potter. Younger years" yet. We see him bullying Severus in the pensieve scene, but we don't know EVERYTHING about his relationship with Snape yet. What we do know that at the age of 16 or so, James saved Snape's life. What we do know that at the age of 16 James's family harbored his friend, who run from Dark Arts home. What we do know is already at the age of 15 James reacts badly to the worst insult , which person can be called in Wisarding World. James may have been arrogant at that time, but I am very HESITANT to characterise him as just ARROGANT and nothing else. From nrenka at yahoo.com Mon Nov 29 00:04:14 2004 From: nrenka at yahoo.com (nrenka) Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 00:04:14 -0000 Subject: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118741 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" wrote: > Carol: > I read Nora's argument and understand her perspective, but even if > she's right that the Dark Arts, the pureblood ideology, and > Voldemort go together, there's no evidence that *James* was > thinking in those terms at this time, or that he assoiciated > Severus and Slytherin with the mindset that Nora calls "fascist." He does freak out when Snape uses 'Mudblood', though. The bullying started before then, but that seems to be what really keeps it going and even ups the ante. The essence of the ideology argument with kids is that it's there and influencing their actions, even if it's not something that they are openly thinking in terms of. Think about Draco Malfoy. He's the product of his environment, and indeed, his major narrative function (as he is a hopelessly incompetent rival figure, at present) is to let us see how someone raised in a DE household thinks and acts. I doubt he's thought through his ideology all the way, thinking deeply in their terms, but he's clearly acting in accordance with its dictates. Mudbloods are bad, purebloods are good, those people are inferior and worthy only of scorn, etc. > Carol: > Any particular reason why? Surely this is not the same James we hear > calling to Lily that he'll hold off Voldemort while she takes Harry > and runs? The James who died trying to fight for his family is > admirable and courageous. The James who bullied Severus for the > entertainment of his bored friend is arrogant and egotistical. James > did a lot of growing up, IMO, in the years between the Pensieve > incident and Godric's Hollow. That's a fairly strict dichotomy to be observing, painting James solely in one set of terms in the past and then marveling "Where did those other things come from?" Given JKR's fairly essentialist metaphysics, I think that the seeds of the latter, and probably at least some expression thereof, was always there. We need to remember all of the fond comments made by people about James Potter at school, and try to figure out exactly how they connect with the obvious negatives. To fail to do so is to commit deliberately one-sided analysis. People develop, as well, without the need for sudden traumatic events. The Big BANG is only one paradigm amongst many, after all. > Carol: > And there's no indication that anything terrible has yet happened in > his young life to stir him up and start him thinking about serious > issues like VW1. Hogwarts is a haven, and the students there live a > sheltered life without even knowing it--as James will learn later > when he starts losing friends and family and the Order members are > picked off one by one. Hogwarts may well be something of a haven, but it's certainly not a complete haven from the ideas filtering in as well. It's surely not a coincidence that *all* of the infamous 'Gang of Slytherins', Snape included, went and became DEs? Kids, especially upper-years, are generally fairly aware of the circulating currents in society, even if they don't know what to do about it. It seems that Voldemort's ideas were an issue while that generation was at school, and that these ideas mattered--witness the reaction to the use of 'Mudblood', just as strong then as it was in a present instance. Again, there is nothing to support the necessity of a BANG-y occurrence in James' life, although it may well turn out to be as such. But even BANGs typically serve to accentuate things that were already there. I'm willing to bet money that James was brought up in a particular way, and had certain ideas drilled into his head from a young age. There are good reasons to assume things like that rather than simply asserting that Sirius is projecting all of his ideology over onto James post facto. Interesting that Dumbledore compares James and Snape to Harry and Draco, in the first book--that's an ideological clash as well as a personal one, although neither of them is exactly debating politics and philosophy in the halls, either. -Nora notes that if one does not wish to post on a thread, 'not posting' is the only action required From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Mon Nov 29 00:13:37 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 00:13:37 -0000 Subject: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118742 > > Carol: And there's no indication that anything terrible has yet happened in his young life to stir him up and start him thinking about serious issues like VW1. Hogwarts is a haven, and the students there live a sheltered life without even knowing it--as James will learn later when he starts losing friends and family and the Order members are picked off one by one. Alla: Nothing traumatic happened yet? Could be, but surely he saw the war around him, since Voldemort already emerged by their fifth year. Could James develop by seeing the sufferings of others? Nora: snip. It seems that Voldemort's ideas were an issue while that generation was at school, and that these ideas mattered--witness the reaction to the use of 'Mudblood', just as strong then as it was in a present instance. Alla: I will even doubt how much of haven Hogwarts was against Voldemort's ideology, with the war already taking place. It seems to me that party lines were drawn and everybody knew who will be fighting on whose side. Nora: Interesting that Dumbledore compares James and Snape to Harry and Draco, in the first book--that's an ideological clash as well as a personal one, although neither of them is exactly debating politics and philosophy in the halls, either. > Alla: Agreed, definitely. From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Mon Nov 29 00:41:16 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 00:41:16 -0000 Subject: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118743 Carol earlier: > > I read Nora's argument and understand her perspective, but even if she's right that the Dark Arts, the pureblood ideology, and Voldemort go together, there's no evidence that *James* was thinking in those terms at this time, or that he assoiciated Severus and Slytherin with the mindset that Nora calls "fascist." > Nora responded: > He does freak out when Snape uses 'Mudblood', though. The bullying started before then, but that seems to be what really keeps it going and even ups the ante. The essence of the ideology argument with kids is that it's there and influencing their actions, even if it's not something that they are openly thinking in terms of. Carol again: But Ron also "freaks out" when Draco calls Hermione a "mudblood." Can we conclude from that reaction that Ron has a fully developed anti-Slytherin, anti-Voldemort philosophy? I don't think so, based on his reaction to finding out that Lupin was a werewolf and his (mostly true) assumptions about giants and house-elves. James is reacting to an insult to a girl he likes and to a word he would never use to describe her. It's similar, IMO, to the Weasley twins' reaction when Draco insults their family, particularly their mother, IIRC, in OoP. None of it is philosophical or ideological; it's all personal. Carol earlier: > > Any particular reason why? Surely this is not the same James we hear calling to Lily that he'll hold off Voldemort while she takes Harry and runs? The James who died trying to fight for his family is admirable and courageous. The James who bullied Severus for the entertainment of his bored friend is arrogant and egotistical. James did a lot of growing up, IMO, in the years between the Pensieve incident and Godric's Hollow. > Nora responded: > That's a fairly strict dichotomy to be observing, painting James > solely in one set of terms in the past and then marveling "Where did > those other things come from?" Given JKR's fairly essentialist > metaphysics, I think that the seeds of the latter, and probably at > least some expression thereof, was always there. We need to remember all of the fond comments made by people about James Potter at school, and try to figure out exactly how they connect with the obvious negatives. To fail to do so is to commit deliberately one-sided analysis. People develop, as well, without the need for sudden traumatic events. The Big BANG is only one paradigm amongst many, after all. Carol again: I omitted the so-called Prank for the sake of brevity. Clearly that was a step toward maturity. I didn't say anything about a Big BANG; only that there's a great difference between James at fifteen or sixteen and James at twenty-two. And we do know that terrible things happened during that period. We also know that some time after Sirius left home at sixteen and spent summers with the Potters and before Godric's Hollow, James's parents died. If indeed they were murdered by the Death Eaters, that murder would have impelled the previously charming but self-centered James either to seek revenge or to act on his previously latent convictions--possibly even to put two and two together and oppose Voldemort's philosophy along with his actions. I'm not talking about a dichotomy; I'm talking about a progression, which also considers the civilizing influence of Lily and his desire to please her: Pensieve James, Prank James, the James who marries Lily, James as Order member, James as hero. It is not unreasonable to include other motivating factors such as the probable murder of his parents and the canonical murder of various Order members as motivating factors in this progression. Carol, who is posting one last time to this thread because she can't help herself but knows she should be editing instead From Aisbelmon at hotmail.com Mon Nov 29 00:54:43 2004 From: Aisbelmon at hotmail.com (M.Clifford) Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 00:54:43 -0000 Subject: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118744 > > Alla: I see no reason to exclude his hate of DA as ONE of the reasons for such bullying. > > Carol notes: > > We really have no evidence that the Pensieve incident was anything > other than unjustifiable bullying. It *may* have an underlying > ideological basis, but we haven't seen it yet, and having a good > reason for disliking Severus does not give James and Sirius the right to attack and humiliate him. Nor would he have the right to attack and humiliate either of them if the tables were turned. > Valky: We have ample indication that the basis of James dislike of Severus was idealogical, plenty of evidence that James and Sirius were idealistic boys. I see reason to follow an assumption that the bullying was *NOT justified by* but related somehow to the idealogical principles that James and Sirius upheld in their own minds, but no reason *AT ALL* to assume that such thinking did not apply to them or was not pertinent in their day to day reality. Basically the only canon that supports James and Sirius having no motive but hateful bullying for its own sake are Harry's and Lily's *outsider* POV and a vague reproval in hindsight by Remus. That's all anyone can base an assumption on, that there was nothing more to it. It's quite thin really. On a second note since you speak of turning tables, what reason does Snape have to *curse* James at *every* opportunity. Is his attacking of James justifiable? From nrenka at yahoo.com Mon Nov 29 01:03:03 2004 From: nrenka at yahoo.com (nrenka) Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 01:03:03 -0000 Subject: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118745 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" wrote: > Nora responded: >> He does freak out when Snape uses 'Mudblood', though. The bullying >> started before then, but that seems to be what really keeps it >> going and even ups the ante. The essence of the ideology argument >> with kids is that it's there and influencing their actions, even >> if it's not something that they are openly thinking in terms of. > Carol again: > But Ron also "freaks out" when Draco calls Hermione a "mudblood." > Can we conclude from that reaction that Ron has a fully developed > anti-Slytherin, anti-Voldemort philosophy? Hence the "even if it's not something that they are openly thinking in terms of". Ron clearly has been taught "Don't call people Mudblood". This is the basis for his freaking out--it's part of his inculcated ideology, not to believe in the pureblood stuff. > James is reacting to an insult to a girl he likes and to a word he > would never use to describe her. It's similar, IMO, to the Weasley > twins' reaction when Draco insults their family, particularly their > mother, IIRC, in OoP. None of it is philosophical or ideological; > it's all personal. Ideology is often a deeply personal thing! It's what people deeply believe in, and there is no reason to separate 'personal' and 'ideological' in this case. James would never use that word to describe Lily--this tells us something fundamental about James' worldview. Severus Snape *does* use it--this is telling us something about the terms in which he thinks. It's not only that Ron likes Hermione (or James likes Lily), it's that he knows that is a term which one doesn't use because it's nasty and vile in what it says about another human being, and how one perceives that person. > Carol again: > I omitted the so-called Prank for the sake of brevity. Clearly that > was a step toward maturity. I didn't say anything about a Big BANG; > only that there's a great difference between James at fifteen or > sixteen and James at twenty-two. You have been postulating great traumatic events, and that James wouldn't have thought at all about what was going on around him before then. At least that is how I am reading your comments that James was snug and secure in Hogwarts, with nary a care, until his parents got offed. If anything is BANG-y, that line of thought is. > If indeed they were murdered by the Death Eaters, that murder would > have impelled the previously charming but self-centered James > either to seek revenge or to act on his previously latent > convictions--possibly even to put two and two together and oppose > Voldemort's philosophy along with his actions. I'm not talking > about a dichotomy; I'm talking about a progression... Okay. Then the basis of my argument is that his convictions are quite possibly not as latent as you think they are. This is only settleable by cold hard authorial-given fact, in the end. It's perhaps a little bit like Harry. I would argue that he rejects Draco in the beginning not merely out of personal reasons, but with the glimmering of conviction behind it--it's Draco's insulting of Hagrid, who has been kind to Harry, that really seems to get to him. Harry rejects Draco's talk of the right and wrong sort because he doesn't want to desert his friends, but there are also principles underlying it, such as a distaste for how Draco talks about other people. You don't have to walk around quoting Kant to be acting with principle or ideology as an informing factor in your life. It's the job of growing up (and taking a few philosophy classes :) to make things like that more explicit. We're charting Harry's progress towards understanding why he needs to do what he needs to do (made when he does things like think about the Longbottoms, and what Voldemort took away from them); I don't see any reason not to postulate that James had issues of his own (different, natch) that were informing some of his own actions. -Nora thinks that children should not be underestimated as to their ability to think about principles--hence JKR's comments one time that children are not fooled by the rationalizations for unfair behavior that adults often make From Aisbelmon at hotmail.com Mon Nov 29 01:18:41 2004 From: Aisbelmon at hotmail.com (M.Clifford) Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 01:18:41 -0000 Subject: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118747 > > Valky wrote : > > "I find totally strange that Sirius after all we know of him could come across as a calculating murderer. > > In the context of a bitter rampage without thought to consequence I can see Snape could have a point, but his statement is intended a point to a cold feelingless evil Sirius, so I am sure he is not right about that." > > > > Del replies : > > I see what you mean. > > > > However, as you pointed out in another post, it could be that Sirius had very deep issues where the Dark Arts were concerned. So is it really impossible that he would have considered Snape to be so dangerous that he would have seized the opportunity to rid the world of him ? I wouldn't put it past him. > > > > Valky: Ouch yes, I can't quite put it past him either, in the context of *seizing the opportunity*. I can't imagine him doing it without the pressure of a heated moment boiling him up first, but I can imagine Sirius thinking that he could rid the world of evil dangerous Snape. > > Carol adds: > We know that the older Sirius plotted for months to kill Peter, > behaving like a homicidal maniac (attacking the Fat Lady's portrait > and slashing Ron's bed curtains with a twelve-inch knife). He also > would have killed Peter right in front of HRH if Harry hadn't stopped him. Valky: Hmmmm, hard to give you credit for this one Carol. Sirius was an innocent man in Azkaban grieving the loss of his dearest companions in the world. He was not in his right mind, at all. Besides Harry didn't *stop* Sirius and Remus killing Peter. He appealed to their *existing* better nature and they stopped all by themselves. Carol: Given his tendency toward rashness and retaliation, he may also > have intended to murder Peter after Godric's Hollow. So it's also > possible that he wanted to kill Severus as well. It all depends on how deep his hatred went, regardless of its causes or whether the hatred was justified. > Valky: Pardon? Are you saying that Sirius hatred of the person who betrayed and had murdered the most precious friend in the world to him is *unjustified*? Or worse still that this betrayal can even be *compared* to Sirius feelings toward Snape. Carol: > At the very least, he was guilty of reckless endangerment, whether or not he intended for Severus to be killed or worse, bitten and turned into a werewolf. And the consequences for Remus would have been just as bad. So is the young Sirius merely thoughtless, reckless, and vindicative or actually murderous? His conduct can't be justified either way. > Valky: Vindictive, I would choose, since you bring up Sevvie being bitten and turned into a werewolf. He may have arrogantly believed that it would teach Humility to young Snape, who obviously thinks and always thought himself better than Remus by some prejudicial and unfound reasoning. From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Mon Nov 29 01:22:12 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 01:22:12 -0000 Subject: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118748 > > Carol again: > > But Ron also "freaks out" when Draco calls Hermione a "mudblood." Can we conclude from that reaction that Ron has a fully developed anti-Slytherin, anti-Voldemort philosophy? I don't think so, based on his reaction to finding out that Lupin was a werewolf and his (mostly true) assumptions about giants and house- elves. James is reacting to an insult to a girl he likes and to a word he would never use to describe her. It's similar, IMO, to the Weasley twins' reaction when Draco insults their family, particularly their mother, IIRC, in OoP. None of it is philosophical or ideological; it's all personal. > Alla: Erm, yes, we can, IMO. Not "fully developed", but sure the "calling people mudblood is VERY bad thing" ideology. Everybody or almost everybody in WW treats non-humans badly. It is something that should be corrected, but between purebloods ideology and Ron's ideology, I choose Ron's anytime, because he at least understands that muggleborns should be treated equally with purebloods. Someone who says these words at the age of twelve sure has some ideological reason to say that, which is mixed with personal of course: "It's about the most insulting thing he could think of," gasped Ron, coming back up. "Mudblood's a really foul name for someone who is Muggle-born - you know, non-maigc parents. There are some wisards - like Malfoy's family - who think they are better than everyone else because they're what people call pure-blood" - p.116, Cos, paperback. Non-ideological? I beg to differ. From jlnbtr at yahoo.com Sun Nov 28 21:07:52 2004 From: jlnbtr at yahoo.com (Juli) Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2004 13:07:52 -0800 (PST) Subject: Peter/Creevey parallels (was DD and the rat) In-Reply-To: <20041128185727.444.qmail@web53102.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041128210752.10522.qmail@web53103.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 118749 MAGDA SNIPPED I like this parallel much better than Neville/Peter. But which Creevey are we talking about, the oldest (Colin?) or the youngest (Dennis?), both of them seem to worship Harry, which seems very interesting to me since both of them come from a muggle family, they must have read tons of books before Hogwarts, just like Hermione. So, are they alike? YES, definitively, but will the Creevey brothers turn to the Dark Side? NOPE, at least I don't think so, I mean, in 10 years maybe but since we know the series end in 2 years, it's not likely, the oldest would only be in his 6th year, the other at his 5th, so really not much time to become a DE, specially since you consider probably neither one will be of age (17), so how could they do any magic outside Hogwarts, or maybe they could spy, but I doubt The Trio would let them into their secrets. Juli From jlnbtr at yahoo.com Sun Nov 28 21:30:09 2004 From: jlnbtr at yahoo.com (Juli) Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2004 13:30:09 -0800 (PST) Subject: Snape and Dumbledore [was Spy novel?] In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041128213009.63802.qmail@web53105.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 118750 Kneasy: > So why would he [Snape] trust DD enough to put his > life in DD's hands? We don't know. Frustrating isn't > it? Juli: Just like everything else we don't know about Potterverse it's frustrating, we are all grown-ups with jobs and busy schedules, and what do we do in our spare time? We come up with theories about all our unanswered questions. So, here's my theory: Snape has to trust DD just like everyone else because it's his only option, Snape was at Voldemort's side and he switched sides, why? No idea. But he started working for DD, the only wizard who had any chance of vanquishing LV (before we or anyone knew about the prophecy), Snape may know the prophecy (my bet is he does), so he tries in his own special way to keep Harry safe. Back to DD, he's fought LV for 20 years (or something), he knows him better than anyone and he knows what LV is up to. Anyway, before I go on and on, here's my point: Snape trusts DD because he has to, just like DD trusts him, trust is a two-way street. Juli From jlnbtr at yahoo.com Sun Nov 28 21:39:22 2004 From: jlnbtr at yahoo.com (Juli) Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2004 13:39:22 -0800 (PST) Subject: Another Flint? (Was: When?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041128213923.55931.qmail@web53106.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 118751 Carol: > > Speaking of Flints, has anyone wondered how the > > Dementors could bury the polyjuiced Mrs. Crouch > > if they're blind? And I half-recall a passage in > > GoF in which Hermione, who is usually right about > > such things, refers to them as if they're able to > > see through an invisibility cloak. (Can anyone find > > and quote that passage?) Actually Hermione didn't mention it, it was Dumbledore at the first day if PoA at the welcome feast, he just says "You can't fool dementors, not even with an invisibility cloak" Not an exact quote, sorry. 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. Juli From khinterberg at yahoo.com Mon Nov 29 01:50:40 2004 From: khinterberg at yahoo.com (khinterberg) Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 01:50:40 -0000 Subject: Never say never Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118752 Yahoo!Mort was not being very helpful to me and so I couldn't find if there had been someting already said about this. But I was reading the transcript of the World Book Day Chat 2004 and JKR said this: Jangles: Are you going to write books about Harry after school? JK Rowling replies -> Probably not, but I'll never say never because every time I do I immediately break the vow! Is this the closest Jo has come to slipping and saying Harry survives? khinterberg From quyntyre at yahoo.com Sun Nov 28 21:44:56 2004 From: quyntyre at yahoo.com (quyntyre) Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2004 21:44:56 -0000 Subject: Choosing sides In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118753 > Anna: > > What sets Harry apart from other Muggle-borns who manage just > > fine? I see no indication anywhere that a rotten childhood in > > the Muggle world is a prerequisite to love Hogwarts. > > Kneasy: > Loving Hogwarts is not what it's about so far as Harry is > concerned. He's a one off, whether he likes it or not. He's > special. > > Anna: > > Not all of Hogwarts's Muggle-born students are as socially > > awkward, as Hermione used to be. She switched worlds because > > she got the letter, and realized that she is a witch. What > > more reasons do any of the Muggle-borns have? > > Kneasy: > Quite a lot, I'd imagine. > Put yourself in the place of one of the parents of these children. > Out of the blue you're informed that your darling offspring has > been accepted for a totally unknown school that you know nothing > about, cannot visit, requires textbooks covering subjects that > folk used to be burned at the stake for studying, offers no known > qualification and with no career structure at the end of it. > To the average Muggle, what is so wonderful about being a witch or > a wizard? Why should they even believe that they actually exist? > If you received a letter from the Head Dolally of Piglump School of > Sourcery and Spells would you happily pack your child's suitcase > and send them off rejoicing? > I doubt it. > We accept it of course, but we've been let into the secret. We > don't see a problem. > But how many parents would take chances like that where their > children are concerned? "quyntyre": I still don't see how being a Muggle could still make you so socially awkward. Harry, for one, was rather normal, socially, except for the fact that he's "the boy who lived," trying his best to cope with such a different world as most children would if lingering in such a different place as the "magical world." There are other muggle-born characters who are able to fit in socially, such as Dean Thomas. There are more than just one muggle-born in Hogwarts, yet Hermione stood out since the very beginning as annoying. Hermione just didn't have great social skills, that's all, nothing to blame her muggle background. And about Harry joining Hogwarts: I'm sure he would've loved to join the school despite the amout of love Dursley might have given him. No matter how much a child's parents/guardians may disapprove, the chance to join a MAGIC SCHOOL, learn SPELLS, ride a BROOMSTICK, and have your very own WAND would be mindblowingly AWESOME. Sure, the parents might be reluctant in giving their child up for a very fishy education that they have little idea of its benefits, but I'm sure Harry wouldn't mind leaving for magic. Hey, if I were 11 years old, I'd want to be the first living creature to board the train to the Piglump School of Sourcery and Spells the day it departs for school! I'm sure my parents would have a fit if I've enrolled into a school of obscure education like "magic." But, there could be parents willing to sacrifice a year for their children to experience something as a magic school. Maybe Hermione's parents figured that she's clever enough to catch up with her muggle classmates if her first year at Hogwarts turns out to be a waste. Maybe other parents had similar agendas if things did go wrong. Some may think being one year behind your peers couldn't be too bad. The day the little witches and wizards return home and hearing their childrens' stories and seeing their marks and other things like that might have convinced that this "magic school" is, in fact, worthwhile. I'm sure muggle parents of the 1st years might have been mailed (or owled) letters about the structure of the school's education and what might await for their future if they do attend or stay at Hogwarts. The magical world knows of muggles' ignorance of magic and to inform prospective wizards/witches would only make sense. Even if I were a witch of another country moving into Britain, I would be a bit unwilling to throw my child into a school I've never heard of before, keep him/her boarding at my native country's school, and have him/her return to our new home every summer. The Malfoys were about to send their own son, Draco, to Durmstrang, which is out of the country. Though they've already knew of Durmstrang's reputation, I'm sure a magical family from as far as Japan might not know. How would they be informed of Hogwarts's education unless they've been notified themselves? From willsonkmom at msn.com Mon Nov 29 02:33:06 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 02:33:06 -0000 Subject: dark magic was Re: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118754 > > Carol notes: (And wasn't it the Potions OWL rather than the > DADA OWL where this question came up?) Potioncat: Yes, the polyjuice was in the Potions OWLs. From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Mon Nov 29 02:39:41 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 02:39:41 -0000 Subject: Never say never In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118755 Khinterberg: > Yahoo!Mort was not being very helpful to me and so I couldn't find if there had been someting already said about this. But I was reading the transcript of the World Book Day Chat 2004 and JKR said this: Jangles: Are you going to write books about Harry after school? JK Rowling replies -> Probably not, but I'll never say never because every time I do I immediately break the vow! > > Is this the closest Jo has come to slipping and saying Harry survives? Alla: I also look for those slipups, because I want them to happen :o) Well there is also an answer to the question whether Harry will become a Minister of Magic on the website, right? If she answers seventeen is way too young to become involved with politics (paraphrase), dare I hope that Harry will become Minister of Magic at the later point of his life? Which would also mean that he will succesfully survive the war. I also keep looking but cannot find the quote, which said something to the effect "in the years to come, Harry could not understand how did he survive the exams with Voldemort breathing down his neck" I think this quote is from PS/SS, but maybe it is just my imagination? From willsonkmom at msn.com Mon Nov 29 02:45:58 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 02:45:58 -0000 Subject: Happy Birthday Bill Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118756 May I be the first to wish Bill Weasley a happy birthday 11/29 (as per calendar on JKR site.) Potioncat From snow15145 at yahoo.com Mon Nov 29 02:46:04 2004 From: snow15145 at yahoo.com (snow15145) Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 02:46:04 -0000 Subject: Hogwarts letters Re: Choosing sides In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118757 Del replies to Kneasy: I commented on this a few weeks ago. Many people seem to assume that Muggle-borns are necessarily happy to discover that they are wizards and witches, and that they all choose to go to Hogwarts. But the fact is : we don't know how many Muggleborns who receive the letter actually come to Hogwarts. Most of all, we don't know *why* they decide to come to Hogwarts. And we don't know why their parents let them come. Snow: I don't know whether the parents or the child would be ecstatic over the offer to attend Hogwarts but it would, after many years of unusual happenings with the child, give both the parents and the child a reason for the child's strange behavior. The child itself has probably realized and wondered why they can make things happen and may have felt surprised, guilty, ashamed or confused by their own unexplainable behavior Harry did. The average muggle parent of a child would not be utmost suspicious of magic being involved and would be puzzled over what they should do about this behavior from their child. If the parents were to contact a doctor about their suspicions or apprehensions, it could be misconstrued as their own psychological abnormalities. If you have a child that produces behavior beyond their control you would most naturally seek out professional advice in an attempt to help the child harness this behavior. As an example let's use Hermione's situation, being the bright witch that she is, most likely exhibited unusual behavior at an early age. These early happenings from Hermione would have been unexplainable to an average muggle doctor but a bit concerning to her parents. I'm sure the highly regarded dentists would be a bit apprehensive in seeking advice about suspected magical behavior from their child, that could also damage their reputation, instead it would be best to wait it out, after all they could be mistaken. Finally after eleven years of telling themselves that she would grow out of it, they receive a letter from Hogwarts that Hermione was detected as a witch and is invited to a school that would be suited to her talent. Relieved that there was an answer to the unexplainable activities that they had quietly endured with this youngster, they would be more apt to consider Hogwarts a proper setting, which would meet their child's needs as well as their own considering they may have to explain to a muggle teacher why Hermione had... What would be the alternative to accepting this invitation to Hogwarts? For the child to realize their magical potential but be denied nurturing of that ability would only infuriate the child, it would not stop the ability that the child has. (I am assuming that, like Harry, the child themselves are to receive the Hogwarts invitation) This has brought to mind a new controversy. Who received the Hogwarts letter for Tom Riddle; Tom or the institution? What might the orphanage have observed of Tom's earlier magical abilities? Did Tom realize his gift early on? The orphanage has guardianship over Tom soooo who granted permission for Tom to attend Hogwarts? I suppose that the orphanage could just realize the offer from Hogwarts as one less mouth to feed but only until summer break. What did Tom do over the summer; did he make any friends in his dorm in Slytherin house for correspondence from the orphanage? We can at least assume that if Tom didn't make any friends he did examine his fellow students to the degree that he could use them to his benefit, such as Hagrid. Tom had such a fear of going to the orphanage that he incriminated Hagrid and his pet spider. Why does Tom appear to be more reluctant to go back to the orphanage over the summer than Harry does to go back to the Dursley's is it Tom's hatred for muggles? COS The Very Secret Diary "My dear boy," said Dippet kindly. "I cannot possibly let you stay at school over the summer. Surely you want to go home for the holidays?" "No," said Riddle at once. "I'd much rather stay at Hogwarts than go back to that ?to that-" Harry, even after his worst encounters with Voldemort, did not inquire to the headmaster as Tom did, of an alternative summer location. Although Harry had thought about why he had to go back to the Dursley's, Harry did not retaliate over going back to the Dursley's even after all he had endured as Tom had; why, what could be worse for Tom at the orphanage, than what Harry endured at the Dursley's? Snow From catlady at wicca.net Mon Nov 29 02:59:27 2004 From: catlady at wicca.net (Catlady (Rita Prince Winston)) Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 02:59:27 -0000 Subject: Remus (actually) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118759 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Sharon" wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/118695: << Catlady: <<< I don't know if young Remus recognized the bullying as morally wrong or merely as against the school rules. If he did (as Harry did, and most of the reader do, but James, Sirius, Peter, and a number of their watching classmates did not), then he had a separate internal struggle between the fact that he liked those boys and the fact that they were behaving in a very not-like-able way. >>> I think it was also something of self-preservation. "If I tell them That bullying is wrong, then I could very well be the next target." By remaining silent (and neither condoning nor condemning their actions), Remus is essentially keeping himself safe from being a target in the future. >> Well, that does happen in real life. But it seems inconsistent to me in this case. If Remus thought his friends would HURT him (would attack him, not just stop liking him), then he didn't have much trust in their loyalty and commitment to him. The loyalty and commitment that Sirius expressed in PoA in the Shrieking Shack, when Sirius seemed quite sincere when he indicated that he or James would have been willing to die to save each other, or Peter, or Remus. (okay, he only SAID it about James and Peter, but he LIVED it in his stupid 'clever' Secret Keeper switch -- he intended to be a red herring to be caught and tortured to death by LV while the real Secret Keeper was safely hidden to protect James.) But in that PoA scene, Remus acted like he was part of the same loyalty and commitment: for no better reason than his loyalty to Sirius and the late James, he was going to join Sirius in killing Peter, thus switching 180 degrees from the first good job he's had in his life to being a wanted criminal on the run or a captured criminal in Azkaban. So my strong emotional feeling is, if Remus did all that for a loyalty that he didn't believe in, then Pippin is right about ESE!Lupin. Which would be horrible, as I love poor dear brave kind competent ethical Remus so much. From snow15145 at yahoo.com Mon Nov 29 03:03:03 2004 From: snow15145 at yahoo.com (snow15145) Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 03:03:03 -0000 Subject: Never say never In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118760 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "dumbledore11214" wrote: > > > Khinterberg: > > > Yahoo!Mort was not being very helpful to me and so I couldn't find > if there had been someting already said about this. But I was > reading the transcript of the World Book Day Chat 2004 and JKR said > this: > Jangles: Are you going to write books about Harry after school? > JK Rowling replies -> Probably not, but I'll never say never because > every time I do I immediately break the vow! > > > > Is this the closest Jo has come to slipping and saying Harry > survives? > > > Alla: > > I also look for those slipups, because I want them to happen :o) > > Well there is also an answer to the question whether Harry will > become a Minister of Magic on the website, right? > If she answers seventeen is way too young to become involved with > politics (paraphrase), dare I hope that Harry will become Minister > of Magic at the later point of his life? > Which would also mean that he will succesfully survive the war. > > > I also keep looking but cannot find the quote, which said something > to the effect "in the years to come, Harry could not understand how > did he survive the exams with Voldemort breathing down his neck" > > I think this quote is from PS/SS, but maybe it is just my > imagination? Snow: SS Through The Trapdoor "In Years to come, Harry would never quite remember how he had managed to get through his exams when he half expected Voldemort to come bursting through the door at any moment." The "In Years to come" reference is always a good sign but carries an even greater implication when it is coupled by the, expected appearance of Voldemort statement, which should imply that Harry at the least survives Voldemort to look back and reflect on this moment In the years to come. I have always suspected that Harry will live and this passage has given me the most reason to believe it to be true. Snow From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Mon Nov 29 03:09:10 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 03:09:10 -0000 Subject: Choosing sides In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118761 Nora wrote : "We are told, fairly early on, that lots of odd things have happened to young Harry--his hair fixing itself, some seeming teleportation, etc. Not too much of a stretch to assume that strange magical things happen with other kids." Del replies : Agreed. But it is also strongly implied that Harry is powerfully magical. After all, Neville had to be thrown through the window to do something magical. I would suppose that many Muggleborns rarely do anything strange. Nora wrote : " Combine that with parents who actually observe what is going on with their offspring instead of carrying out a regimen of neglect and the fact that a teacher comes to talk to them about Hogwarts (per interview--I forget where, though), and you have a more powerful rationale for letting the kids go off. It's obvious that they can do things the normal kids can't, things that are, well, magical: that may play a large role in letting them go, the realization that your child is talented and will only learn how to use it at one place." Del replies : That's only if you place magic higher than any other talent the kid might have, or learning to control it higher than any other goal the kid and/or the parents might have. I doubt we can assume that all parents and all kids give in that easily. Nora wrote : "...with the possible added bonus that things could get hairy if you don't. Wouldn't shock me if at least some Muggleborns' magic manifested itself in messy and costly ways on things like the family china. :)" Del replies : No need for a child to be magical to get that kind of results :-D But really my point is that accidental and wandless magic are extremely rare. They can hardly justify sending your kid away to some unknown place, giving up on everything that is his life right now, and abandoning any dreams or goals he might have had for the future. I can understand why *some* parents and kids would do that, but I can hardly imagine that *most* of them would do it. Del From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Mon Nov 29 03:23:04 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 03:23:04 -0000 Subject: Hogwarts letters Re: Choosing sides In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118762 Snow wrote : " I don't know whether the parents or the child would be ecstatic over the offer to attend Hogwarts but it would, after many years of unusual happenings with the child, give both the parents and the child a reason for the child's strange behavior." Del replies : You too assume that all magical kids routinely make weird things happen, but it's not true. Neville had to be forced to produce some magic. It might depend on the magical ablities, or on self-control or whatever. In particular, if it depends on self-control, then hopefully as the child grows up he will learn to master himself and stop those things from happening. And if he can't, then that means that he will never be able to live in the Muggle World anymore. How nice, as a parent, to be told that your 11-year-old kid is condemned to live in another world forever... Moreover, if it was just a matter of learning to control their magic to avoid unexpected bursts of it, I'm sure the Muggleborn kids could be either shortly trained or have some spell or potion used on them to obtain that result. Hogwarts isn't training them not to do magic ; exactly the opposite in fact. Snow wrote : "What would be the alternative to accepting this invitation to Hogwarts? For the child to realize their magical potential but be denied nurturing of that ability would only infuriate the child, it would not stop the ability that the child has." Del replies : What about any other ability that child might have ? What about any other interests he might have ? Going to Hogwarts means saying good-bye to his friends, abandoning his music or sport training, leaving the Boy Scouts or whatever organisation he might belong to, missing out on the week-ends at Grandma's, and so on. Not so obvious a choice I say. Del From nrenka at yahoo.com Mon Nov 29 03:31:33 2004 From: nrenka at yahoo.com (nrenka) Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 03:31:33 -0000 Subject: Choosing sides In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118763 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "delwynmarch" wrote: > Del: > But really my point is that accidental and wandless magic are > extremely rare. They can hardly justify sending your kid away to > some unknown place, giving up on everything that is his life right > now, and abandoning any dreams or goals he might have had for the > future. I can understand why *some* parents and kids would do that, > but I can hardly imagine that *most* of them would do it. We have no data besides Harry and Neville for the accidental magic, so we can't tell if it's rare or not for young magical kids--could be, could not. But I don't think it's quite accurate to strike such a strict dichotomy as you're wanting to. First of all, I am given to understand that boarding school is normal for a lot of kids in Britain--you'll be sending the kids somewhere, no matter what. Then there is the other factor, that magic is pretty amazing, and may well trump the other talents that a kid is showing. 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. A Muggleborn who goes home for the summer and gets dipped back into (as a hypothetic) a rich vein of Muggle artistic culture might really have something to bring into society. Dreams and goals change, but I don't think it's following the Law of the Excluded Middle, as your argument seems to put forward. -Nora hopes that students get to follow their own interests--hey, we never knew there were school clubs until OotP, right? From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Mon Nov 29 03:40:40 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 03:40:40 -0000 Subject: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118764 Carol earlier: > > > > We really have no evidence that the Pensieve incident was anything > > other than unjustifiable bullying. It *may* have an underlying > > ideological basis, but we haven't seen it yet, and having a good > > reason for disliking Severus does not give James and Sirius the > right to attack and humiliate him. Nor would he have the right to > attack and humiliate either of them if the tables were turned. > > > > Valky: > We have ample indication that the basis of James dislike of Severus > was idealogical, plenty of evidence that James and Sirius were > idealistic boys. I see reason to follow an assumption that the > bullying was *NOT justified by* but related somehow to the > idealogical principles that James and Sirius upheld in their own > minds, but no reason *AT ALL* to assume that such thinking did not > apply to them or was not pertinent in their day to day reality. Carol again: What evidence are you referring to? Canon, please? C. From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Mon Nov 29 03:50:42 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 03:50:42 -0000 Subject: Happy Birthday Bill In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118765 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "potioncat" wrote: > > May I be the first to wish Bill Weasley a happy birthday 11/29 > (as per calendar on JKR site.) > > Potioncat Carol: There goes my next-to-last hope for a November birthday for Snape. I guess I'll have to look for it in mid-winter. carol From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Mon Nov 29 03:53:54 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 03:53:54 -0000 Subject: Happy Birthday Bill In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118766 Potioncat: May I be the first to wish Bill Weasley a happy birthday 11/29 (as per calendar on JKR site.) Carol: There goes my next-to-last hope for a November birthday for Snape. I guess I'll have to look for it in mid-winter. Alla: Hmmm, what if Snape and Harry share the same birthday? Wouldn't it be a fun celebration party? :o) Imagine the possibilities. :) From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Mon Nov 29 04:16:00 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 04:16:00 -0000 Subject: Happy Birthday Bill In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118767 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "dumbledore11214" wrote: > > > Potioncat: > > May I be the first to wish Bill Weasley a happy birthday 11/29 (as > per calendar on JKR site.) > > Carol: > There goes my next-to-last hope for a November birthday for Snape. I > guess I'll have to look for it in mid-winter. > > > Alla: > > Hmmm, what if Snape and Harry share the same birthday? Wouldn't it > be a fun celebration party? :o) > > Imagine the possibilities. :) Carol again: I'm just glad that Snape's birthday wasn't Halloween! Carol From drednort at alphalink.com.au Mon Nov 29 04:16:42 2004 From: drednort at alphalink.com.au (Shaun Hately) Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 15:16:42 +1100 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Hogwarts letters Re: Choosing sides In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <41AB3D5A.18638.15D6BC4@localhost> No: HPFGUIDX 118768 On 29 Nov 2004 at 2:46, snow15145 wrote: > Snow: > I don't know whether the parents or the child would be ecstatic over > the offer to attend Hogwarts but it would, after many years of > unusual happenings with the child, give both the parents and the > child a reason for the child's strange behavior. The child itself has > probably realized and wondered why they can make things happen and > may have felt surprised, guilty, ashamed or confused by their own > unexplainable behavior Harry did. The average muggle parent of a > child would not be utmost suspicious of magic being involved and > would be puzzled over what they should do about this behavior from > their child. If the parents were to contact a doctor about their > suspicions or apprehensions, it could be misconstrued as their own > psychological abnormalities. Just adding a perspective. I work with exceptionally and profoundly gifted children. These are kids who are, in colloquial terms, really, really, smart. Normal giftedness is generally taking to be something like 1 in 50 kids or 1 in 20. These kids are 1 in 10,000 or more. It's not the same situation as having magical ability in the HP universe, but a lot of these kids are not formally identified until quite late in their childhoods - age 8 or older is not uncommon, some not until their early teens. But many, many of them prior to formal identification display tendencies that are 'different' or 'concerning' to parents. And I can certainly see a possibility that happens with muggle parents of wizarding kids in the HP universe. When these parents finally find out what is 'wrong' with their child - and find out that it's not actually something 'bad' but something that has the potential to be really positive, many of them are ecstatic - and many, many of them find themselves taking an approach to their children's education that they never dreamed they'd be taking. My parents wound up sending me to a 'snob' school of a type they really didn't like - because at the time it seemed the only available option. I know quite a few other kids whose parents have made similar choices, or other choices like homeschooling. Very, very few parents choose to do nothing - it does occasionally happen. A very large number wind up making choices that they are actually not incredibly comfortable with, and never would have dreamed of making under other circumstances. They make choices they really don't like - for the sake of their kids. I think the biggest problem with muggle parents would be convincing them this is real. Once that is overcome, I can see a very high proportion of these parents agreeing to send their child to Hogwarts - not because they necessarily *like* the idea - but because it seems to be the only choice available for their child to develop the talents they have. I have seen dozens of parents in precisely that situation - and most of them choose the school - even if they have serious reservations about it. Yours Without Wax, Dreadnought Shaun Hately | www.alphalink.com.au/~drednort/thelab.html (ISTJ) | drednort at alphalink.com.au | ICQ: 6898200 "You know the very powerful and the very stupid have one thing in common. They don't alter their views to fit the facts. They alter the facts to fit the views. Which can be uncomfortable if you happen to be one of the facts that need altering." The Doctor - Doctor Who: The Face of Evil Where am I: Frankston, Victoria, Australia From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Mon Nov 29 04:26:04 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 04:26:04 -0000 Subject: Hogwarts letters Re: Choosing sides In-Reply-To: <41AB3D5A.18638.15D6BC4@localhost> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118769 Shaun: > I think the biggest problem with muggle parents would be convincing them this is real. Once that is overcome, I can see a very high proportion of these parents agreeing to send their child to Hogwarts - not because they necessarily *like* the idea - but because it seems to be the only choice available for their child to develop the talents they have. Alla: Hi, Shaun! Nice to see you posting. :) 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. From azriona at juno.com Mon Nov 29 04:37:30 2004 From: azriona at juno.com (Sharon) Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 04:37:30 -0000 Subject: Peter/Creevey parallels (was DD and the rat) In-Reply-To: <20041128185727.444.qmail@web53102.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118770 Carol: > > The way the Creevey [read 'creepy'] brothers behave towards Harry > > is very similar to Peter's abject sycophancy with James. Harry so > > far has not been quite so nasty to them as the rest of MWPP were > > towards Peter, but he seems fairly tempted, and who can blame him? > > They are extremely irritating. > > Magda: > The relationship (if we can call it that; it seems more like a > sporadic distant acquaintance) between pre-OOTP Colin Creevey and > Harry might be a good starting point to understand the relationship > between Peter and James. > I think the main difference, though, is that Colin seems to have grown out of the hero-worship he's had toward Harry. After CoS, we didn't hear very much from him at all - he'd pop up every now and then, but not because he was trailing Harry. And there was practically no mention of him at all in OoP. If he was supposed to be still Harry's Number One Fan, I'd think we'd have seen more of him. I think Peter was far more attached to James than Colin is to Harry - and vice versa. --azriona From azriona at juno.com Mon Nov 29 04:47:28 2004 From: azriona at juno.com (Sharon) Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 04:47:28 -0000 Subject: Never say never In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118771 > Snow: > > SS Through The Trapdoor "In Years to come, Harry would never quite > remember how he had managed to get through his exams when he half > expected Voldemort to come bursting through the door at any moment." > > The "In Years to come" reference is always a good sign but carries an > even greater implication when it is coupled by the, expected > appearance of Voldemort statement, which should imply that Harry at > the least survives Voldemort to look back and reflect on this moment > In the years to come. > > I have always suspected that Harry will live and this passage has > given me the most reason to believe it to be true. > > Snow Yeah, but just to play Devil's Advocate - seeing as how the quote is from the first book, couldn't "years to come" simply refer to the following seven years, in which we're fairly certain Harry doesn't die? He does reflect on what he's done in the previous years already in OoP (he certainly does enough shouting about it to Ron and Hermione, anyway...) --azriona From azriona at juno.com Mon Nov 29 04:49:51 2004 From: azriona at juno.com (Sharon) Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 04:49:51 -0000 Subject: Happy Birthday Bill In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118772 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "dumbledore11214" wrote: > > > Potioncat: > > May I be the first to wish Bill Weasley a happy birthday 11/29 (as > per calendar on JKR site.) > > Carol: > There goes my next-to-last hope for a November birthday for Snape. I > guess I'll have to look for it in mid-winter. > > > Alla: > > Hmmm, what if Snape and Harry share the same birthday? Wouldn't it > be a fun celebration party? :o) > Maybe, but I can think of more fun possibilities with the reinterpretation of the Lost Prophecy, if they share the same birthday...*rubs hands together in glee* --azriona > Imagine the possibilities. :) From azriona at juno.com Mon Nov 29 04:58:13 2004 From: azriona at juno.com (Sharon) Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 04:58:13 -0000 Subject: Hogwarts letters Re: Choosing sides In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118773 Snow: > This has brought to mind a new controversy. Who received the Hogwarts > letter for Tom Riddle; Tom or the institution? What might the > orphanage have observed of Tom's earlier magical abilities? Did Tom > realize his gift early on? The orphanage has guardianship over Tom > soooo who granted permission for Tom to attend Hogwarts? I suppose > that the orphanage could just realize the offer from Hogwarts as one > less mouth to feed but only until summer break. Not only that, but who paid the 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 would think that Tom himself would receive the letter - after all, Harry's letters were made out to him, not to Petunia & Vernon, who were after all his legal guardians. I believe also that JKR has said that in the cases of Muggle-born children, a witch or wizard is sent to explain to the parents the meaning of the letter. This makes me think that something similar would have happened in Tom's case, to explain to the people in charge of the orphanage about Tom's special situation. --azriona From azriona at juno.com Mon Nov 29 05:04:59 2004 From: azriona at juno.com (Sharon) Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 05:04:59 -0000 Subject: Remus (actually) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118774 > << Catlady: > <<< I don't know if young Remus recognized the bullying as morally > wrong or merely as against the school rules. If he did (as Harry did, > and most of the reader do, but James, Sirius, Peter, and a number of > their watching classmates did not), then he had a separate internal > struggle between the fact that he liked those boys and the fact that > they were behaving in a very not-like-able way. >>> > > Azriona: I think it was also something of self-preservation. "If I tell them > That bullying is wrong, then I could very well be the next target." > By remaining silent (and neither condoning nor condemning their > actions), Remus is essentially keeping himself safe from being a > target in the future. >> > Catlady: > Well, that does happen in real life. But it seems inconsistent to me > in this case. If Remus thought his friends would HURT him (would > attack him, not just stop liking him), then he didn't have much trust > in their loyalty and commitment to him. I don't think Remus thought for one minute that James and Sirius would out and out *hurt* him - I mean, they don't actually physically hurt Severus, but they do humiliate and hurt his feelings, and I think Remus might have been worried that the same level of ridicule could be directed toward him. Was it likely? No, not really. I don't think, had he spoken up, that James and Sirius would have turned on him. But fear is a funny thing, particularly when you're a kid and you feel vulnerable. And I think Remus felt incredibly vulnerable. He had a very huge secret that was potentially something that could get him expelled, and if James and Sirius made a slip (which they had already, leaving the OWL exam) and someone overheard, he'd be in a lot of trouble. So I think he was fairly nervous, and wanting to remain in their good graces. If that meant staying silent and letting Severus receive the short end of the wand (so to speak), then it was a decision he was obviously willing to live with. Catlady: > So my strong emotional feeling is, if Remus did all that for a loyalty > that he didn't believe in, then Pippin is right about ESE!Lupin. Which > would be horrible, as I love poor dear brave kind competent ethical > Remus so much. Agreed. Although as ESE!Lupin, kind of makes you wonder what he knew about Peter, that he was so quick to turn on him in the Shack and go from kindly teacher to blood-crazy killer. (Okay, bit of a stretch, there.) --azriona From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Mon Nov 29 05:08:53 2004 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 05:08:53 -0000 Subject: Peter/Creevey parallels (was DD and the rat) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118775 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Sharon" wrote: > > Carol: > > > The way the Creevey [read 'creepy'] brothers behave towards Harry is very similar to Peter's abject sycophancy with James. Harry so far has not been quite so nasty to them as the rest of MWPP were towards Peter, but he seems fairly tempted, and who can blame him? > > > They are extremely irritating. > > > Carol notes: I believe it was Carolyn who posted this remark. I haven't posted to this thread. Carol, who isn't particularly interested in the Creevey brothers but is bothered a little by the Flint that allows second-year Dennis to join the group in Hogsmeade From azriona at juno.com Mon Nov 29 05:09:37 2004 From: azriona at juno.com (Sharon) Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 05:09:37 -0000 Subject: Trusting characters Re: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118776 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "potioncat" wrote: > > > > Alla: > >> IF I will doubt ANY character's testimony, I will not be able to > > support ANY of my arguments with canon's testimony. > > > > Untill Sirius is PROVEN to be a liar, I will take his testimony > > seriously, I see no reason not to. > > Well....he's not a liar, per se, but he's awfully hypocritical. He tells Harry that you can tell a wizard by the way he treats his inferiors, but then he goes and abuses Kreacher. He obviously has a great amount of contempt for his brother - not because the boy was a Death Eater, but because he was "soft enough" to fall in with a crowd that Sirius did not approve of. And he tells Peter that as a friend, he would have died for him, although 12 years previously, he refused to be Secret Keeper and thus gave up the chance to die for James. So Sirius isn't a liar, but I still would take anything he tells me with a hefty grain of salt. --azriona From martyb1130 at aol.com Mon Nov 29 03:03:14 2004 From: martyb1130 at aol.com (martyb1130 at aol.com) Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2004 22:03:14 EST Subject: Hermione's Time Turner Message-ID: <81.1bc6279e.2edbeb72@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 118777 Hello, is anybody else interested in what else this time turner in PoA can reveal or help? Why didn't Prof. McGonagall use this when she found out that the Potters were murdered? How much of the past does this time turner go in? It is very curious that it comes up in book 3 when it could be so useful. Brodeur From jlnbtr at yahoo.com Mon Nov 29 02:35:34 2004 From: jlnbtr at yahoo.com (Juli) Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2004 18:35:34 -0800 (PST) Subject: Never say never In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041129023534.96436.qmail@web53103.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 118778 khinterberg > Is this the closest Jo has come to slipping and > saying Harry survives? Juli: I just went to JKR's website, and in the Edinburgh book festival she said: "In your stories, will Harry Potter ever grow up as a Wizard? JKR: Well, I don't think it is giving to much away to say that he will survive to book seven, mainly because I don't want to be strangled by you lot, but I am not going to say whether he grows any older than that because I have never said that. You are good at putting me on the spot!" I also think I read somewhere where JKR says Harry needs at least 2 more years to kill LV, I'm looking for it, but if I find it, I'll let you know. Juli __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? The all-new My Yahoo! - What will yours do? http://my.yahoo.com From jlnbtr at yahoo.com Mon Nov 29 02:47:48 2004 From: jlnbtr at yahoo.com (Juli) Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2004 18:47:48 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] birthday In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041129024748.99544.qmail@web53101.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 118779 Hi! Did anyone else notice today (nov 29) is Bill Weasley's birthday? (For whoever keeps track of them.) Juli __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Take Yahoo! Mail with you! Get it on your mobile phone. http://mobile.yahoo.com/maildemo From willsonkmom at msn.com Mon Nov 29 05:46:13 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 05:46:13 -0000 Subject: Happy Birthday Bill In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118780 Arizona: > Maybe, but I can think of more fun possibilities with the > reinterpretation of the Lost Prophecy, if they share the same > birthday...*rubs hands together in glee* > > Potioncat: I'm still betting on a Scorpio birthday for Snape. Particularly with his sarcastic touch. From hickengruendler at yahoo.de Mon Nov 29 06:10:50 2004 From: hickengruendler at yahoo.de (hickengruendler) Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 06:10:50 -0000 Subject: Peter/Creevey parallels (was DD and the rat) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118781 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" wrote: > Carol, who isn't particularly interested in the Creevey brothers but > is bothered a little by the Flint that allows second-year Dennis to > join the group in Hogsmeade Hickengruendler: Well, I think there are worse Flints in the books. If this really is a flint. Dennis could have just sneaked out in the castle, like some other students *coughHarrycough* did as well. Maybe he asked Colin, who asked Ginny, who asked the twins to help him, because he wanted to attend the meeting. On topic about the similarities between Peter and the Creeveys: I think that this comparison is much closer as the one between Peter and Neville. (Neville is a loner and Peter a tag-along, except that they are both a bit on the chubby side, I see no similarities). I think if Harry were more like James and would enjoy this kind of hero- worshipping, Colin could have a similar position in the group than Wormtail did. However, just because there are similarities does not mean, that Colin will turn out to be a traitor. In fact, I would be disappointed if a possible traitor were someone that relatively obvious. From snow15145 at yahoo.com Mon Nov 29 06:20:13 2004 From: snow15145 at yahoo.com (snow15145) Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 06:20:13 -0000 Subject: Hogwarts letters Re: Choosing sides In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118782 Del replies to (me)Snow : You too assume that all magical kids routinely make weird things happen, but it's not true. Neville had to be forced to produce some magic. It might depend on the magical ablities, or on self-control or whatever. Snow: Different circumstances with non-muggle born children like Neville who for some reason needed to be prompted to show his ability. Del replies: What about any other ability that child might have ? What about any other interests he might have ? Going to Hogwarts means saying good-bye to his friends, abandoning his music or sport training, leaving the Boy Scouts or whatever organisation he might belong to, missing out on the week-ends at Grandma's, and so on. Not so obvious a choice I say. Snow: I realize where you are approaching this from but you seem not to be taking into account the fact that this magical tendency that appears abruptly, without notification can be scary to the child and/or his peers, which could cause him to feel like a freak, different or unusual and therefore not be accepted to join the main stream. Let's take it to a different level, yet the same, Lupin the werewolf. If your child had these tendencies, that again are non-expectant, and you receive a letter informing you that your child may attend a school where he may be accepted more readily than with the common populous, would you then deny him the opportunity? The child has not lost a world but added a world. Unless the parent abandons the child to the magical world, what has the child lost? Snow From ms_melanie1999 at yahoo.com Mon Nov 29 06:35:40 2004 From: ms_melanie1999 at yahoo.com (Miss Melanie) Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2004 22:35:40 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Trusting characters Re: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041129063540.41036.qmail@web53405.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 118783 Well....he's not a liar, per se, but he's awfully hypocritical. He tells Harry that you can tell a wizard by the way he treats his inferiors, but then he goes and abuses Kreacher. He obviously has a great amount of contempt for his brother - not because the boy was a Death Eater, but because he was "soft enough" to fall in with a crowd that Sirius did not approve of. And he tells Peter that as a friend, he would have died for him, although 12 years previously, he refused to be Secret Keeper and thus gave up the chance to die for James. So Sirius isn't a liar, but I still would take anything he tells me with a hefty grain of salt. --azriona My reply: You are twisting everything to make it a lot worst than it really was. Kreacher hated Sirius, he gave Siruis a great deal of abuse I believe this was abuse that was learned from his original owners: Sirius' parents. I mean when they didn't respect Sirius why should Kreacher. And Kreacher stood for everything that he hated in the world. I'm sorry I just think that is poor logic. And as for dying for James, he did that only because of protection. He thought that the death eaters were unto him. It wasn't out of self-protection as much as it was out of protection of Lily and James. And really if he had died, if they all had died who would have taken care of Harry. I know this isn't how it played out but that was the logic at the time. ~Melanie --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Meet the all-new My Yahoo! ? Try it today! [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From bob.oliver at cox.net Mon Nov 29 07:02:19 2004 From: bob.oliver at cox.net (lupinlore) Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 07:02:19 -0000 Subject: Trio Rising (was Re: McGonagall in OOTP ) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118784 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "littleleahstill" wrote: > I do believe McGonagall does her > best within character to stick up for her students- not only at some > professional risk, but, as we see in the 'stunning' scene, at actual > physical risk. > Oh, I certainly agree that McGonagall does what she can within the bounds of her character. But that is precisely my point. Look, let's go at this another way. One problem any author faces who wants to write an adventure story featuring kids is what to do with the adults. To put it simply, if the adults in the story act the way they should, then the adventure can't happen since the kids can't get into the kind of dangerous situations the adventure requires. Now, there are a couple of ways to deal with this. The first, and most common I suppose, is to send the kids somewhere where there ARE no adults. This is the tack Madeleine L'Engle takes in "A Wrinkle in Time" and C.S. Lewis employs in "The Lion, The Witch, and the Wardrobe." The other option is to make the adults fundamentally incompetent, if not downright malicious. This is the tack JKR takes. The adults, by and large, aren't evil -- but they are flawed in ways that cripple them at key points in the plot. Thus Snape is too bitter, McGonagall too stern and unbending, Dumbledore too detached, Sirius too erratic, and Remus too passive to really step in and do their "job" as adults at crucial moments in the HP saga, particularly in OOTP. And therein, I think, lies the interest in the trio. The adults are all, in some sense, "finished products." Although one cannot preclude growth and change, still there is a sense in which the adults have already realized what potential they might have had. They can't really aspire to be that much better than they already are. If they could, the story would be about them, which it ain't. The trio, on the other hand, is in a sense potential incarnate. Sure they aren't perfect and will never be perfect, but they have every possibility of rising above the adults and surpassing them. Thus Ron is interesting because he can surpass Remus and avoid the trap of passivity, self-doubt, and "second-fiddleness" that is such a problem for the adult. Hermione has the chance to grow beyond the flaws that so incapacitated McGonagall at key moments in OOTP. And Harry is much more interesting than Snape because he has the potential to be so much greater than Severus, and yes, to move beyond the flaws that Dumbledore has evinced. Any coming of age story is about the changing of eras. As the trio comes of age, they will almost certainly surpass the adults in key ways (although not, obviously, in all ways as of yet). I would not be surprised to see examples of this in the upcoming books. There is a somewhat sad counter-trend, however. The era of the trio is dawning, but that means the time of the adults is passing. The adults, simply because they ARE adults in a series where the heroes are the kids, are doomed to be falling stars. Merlin must vanish so that Arthur can take ascendancy, Gandalf and Bilbo fade away to leave center stage to Frodo and Sam, and Obi-Wan falls so that Luke can rise to his destiny. In a similar way Dumbledore, Remus, McGonagall, and Snape, although they certainly have important roles yet to play, must inevitably decline so that Harry, Ron, and Hermione can come into their own. Lupinlore From Aisbelmon at hotmail.com Mon Nov 29 07:33:36 2004 From: Aisbelmon at hotmail.com (M.Clifford) Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 07:33:36 -0000 Subject: Trusting characters Re: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118785 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Sharon" wrote: > > Well....he's not a liar, per se, but he's awfully hypocritical. He tells Harry that you can tell a wizard by the way he treats his > inferiors, but then he goes and abuses Kreacher. He obviously has a great amount of contempt for his brother - not because the boy was a Death Eater, but because he was "soft enough" to fall in with a crowd that Sirius did not approve of. > > And he tells Peter that as a friend, he would have died for him, > although 12 years previously, he refused to be Secret Keeper and thus gave up the chance to die for James. > > So Sirius isn't a liar, but I still would take anything he tells me with a hefty grain of salt. > > --azriona Valky: I agree that Sirius is/was a hypocrite, not entirely for the same reasons as you, but that's not why I am posting. What I felt I needed to say is that I don't think Sirius so much *gave up* the chance to die for James, as I recall his plan was to set himself as bait for the DE's to attack. From azriona at juno.com Mon Nov 29 07:39:16 2004 From: azriona at juno.com (Sharon) Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 07:39:16 -0000 Subject: Trusting characters Re: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs In-Reply-To: <20041129063540.41036.qmail@web53405.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118786 Azriona: > Well....he's not a liar, per se, but he's awfully hypocritical. He > tells Harry that you can tell a wizard by the way he treats his > inferiors, but then he goes and abuses Kreacher. He obviously has a > great amount of contempt for his brother - not because the boy was a > Death Eater, but because he was "soft enough" to fall in with a crowd > that Sirius did not approve of. > > And he tells Peter that as a friend, he would have died for him, > although 12 years previously, he refused to be Secret Keeper and thus > gave up the chance to die for James. > > So Sirius isn't a liar, but I still would take anything he tells me > with a hefty grain of salt. > Melanie: > My reply: You are twisting everything to make it a lot worst than it really was. I'm sorry, I really don't think I am, but I did shorten my reply because I was in a bit of a hurry, so maybe my logic didn't make a lot of sense. I'll try to go more in depth now. >Melanie: Kreacher hated Sirius, he gave Siruis a great deal of abuse I believe this was abuse that was learned from his original owners: Sirius' parents. > When, exactly, does Kreacher abuse Sirius? The first time we see them both together, Kreacher gives Sirius a low bow, and in his "public" voice jokes with him and tries to show deference. (It's only under his breath that he calls Sirius a "nasty ungrateful swine" (Chp 6, OoP). But beyond that, Kreacher does zip to Sirius, whereas doesn't even pretend to have a ounce of respect. "He was always a foul little," starts Sirius, before Hermione cuts him off in the same chapter. Now, I won't argue that Kreacher probably did learn his hatred of Sirius from Sirius's own parents. In fact, I'm sure that's exactly where Kreacher picked it up from - and I'm equally certain that Sirius, bitter at having to remain in Grimmauld Place and remain out of the "action" of the Order, took out a lot of frustration on Kreacher. But I'm not *ever* going to say that such a thing was the right thing to do, much less was it forgiveable. It isn't. Just because you don't like someone, you don't mistreat them in front of others. Kreacher, at least, puts a face on his hatred, and never says directly to Sirius, "You're the scum of the earth and you were a rotten son." Sirius was far more verbally abusive toward Kreacher than the other way around. At one point in the books, Sirius tells Harry that you can judge a man by the way he treats his inferiors. (I apologize, I can't mange to find the quote itself.) Dumbledore also tells Harry, "I do not think that Sirius...ever saw Kreacher as a being with feelings as acute as a human's...Sirius did nothing to make Kreacher's lot easier." (Chp 37, OoP) Sirius clearly sees Kreacher as his inferior...and yet he makes his life difficult. How is saying that Sirius was hypocritical in this matter illogical? >Melanie: > And as for dying for James, he did that only because of protection. He thought that the death eaters were unto him. It wasn't out of self-protection as much as it was out of protection of Lily and James. > Azriona: Again, I disagree. First, James didn't simply *think*, he *knew*, having been informed by Dumbledore that there was a spy among them. McGonagall: "...the Potters knew You-Know-who was after them. Dumbledore...had a number of useful spies. One of them tipped him off, and he alterted James and Lily at once." (Chp 10, PoA) As well, Dumbledore knew there were spies in his own ranks: McGonagall: "[Dumbledore] was sure that somebody close to the Potters had been keeping You-Know-Who informed of their movements. Indeed, he has suspected for some time that someone on our side had turned traitor and was passing a lot of information to You-Know-Who." (Chp 10, PoA) Therefore, both James and Sirius knew perfectly well that whoever the Secret Keeper was - that man would be one of Voldy's first stops on his hunt for Harry. Now, think about this for a moment. You're a Dark Lord. You want to kill Harry Potter. You know that you can't manage to find the Potters, so you decide to find their friends instead. Of the three friends - Remus, Peter, and Sirius - which one is closest to the Potters, and therefore most likely to know where to find them? Gee, let me think. "Never saw one without the other," laughs Madam Rosmerta. (Chp 10 PoA). "Quite the double act, Sirius Black and James Potter!" Sirius was not a stupid man. He had to know that he was at the top of the proverbial list of wanted men. And he had to know that once Voldy caught him, there would be no escape until he told his secret or death. Torture is not a happy thing. It's not a fun thing. And yes, I totally believe that had Sirius (or Peter) given the Secret under the influence of torture, it would still work to break the Fidelius Charm, because they would be *giving that secret willingly*. You can torture someone, yes - you can even torture them into giving information. But that information is still given willingly, because at the point at which it is given the person under the influence of torture is so out of their mind with the pain that they will say whatever is necessary in order for it to end. Sirius was a 22 year old kid - when you come down to it. He was scared. I have no doubt that any of us would be as well. Did he hand off the Secret Keeper position because he well and truly believed that Peter would be the last place that Voldy would look - probably. But you can't tell me that Sirius didn't come to that conclusion because he wasn't afraid of what the role of Secret Keeper would bring anyway. He basically shucked off the responsibility to someone else. >Melanie: And really if he had died, if they all had died who would have taken care of Harry. Azriona: Who's to say that the secret would have been given up had Sirius died? If Sirius had died, wouldn't the secret (and James & Lily's location) have died with him? To me, that's the logical conclusion. >From Chp 19, PoA: "THEN YOU SHOULD HAVE DIED," roared Black. "DIED RATHER THAN BETRAY YOUR FRIENDS, AS WE WOULD HAVE DONE FOR YOU!" Right. Sirius Black wasn't willing to die for anyone, but he sure seems to expect it from everyone else. Had he been willing to do so - knowing he wasn't the traitor - he would have been willing to remain the Potter's Secret Keeper. --azriona From azriona at juno.com Mon Nov 29 07:46:45 2004 From: azriona at juno.com (Sharon) Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 07:46:45 -0000 Subject: Trusting characters Re: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118787 Valky: > What I felt I needed to say is that I don't think Sirius so much > *gave up* the chance to die for James, as I recall his plan was to > set himself as bait for the DE's to attack. Chp 10, PoA: McGonagall: "James Potter told Dumbledore that Black would die rather than tell where they were, that Black was planning to go into hiding himself." I don't remember any quotes about Sirius wanting to act as bait - besides, he had a full week to do it in after the the Charm was cast, and he was still safe enough to go running around the countryside checking on Peter's safety. Had he been bait, it would have been pretty stupid to run straight to the real Secret Keeper. --azriona From azriona at juno.com Mon Nov 29 07:52:31 2004 From: azriona at juno.com (Sharon) Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 07:52:31 -0000 Subject: Hermione's Time Turner In-Reply-To: <81.1bc6279e.2edbeb72@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118788 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, martyb1130 at a... wrote: > > Hello, is anybody else interested in what else this time turner in PoA can > reveal or help? Why didn't Prof. McGonagall use this when she found out that the Potters were murdered? How much of the past does this time turner go in? > It is very curious that it comes up in book 3 when it could be so useful. > > Brodeur I had the impression that the Time Turner wasn't actually McGonagall's own possession. She had to get permission, after all, to allow Hermione to have one for classes, and Hermione had to promise to use it *only* for classwork. Besides, had McGonagall used it to save the Potters, I don't know how successful she would have been. Besides, there are laws against actively changing the way history has been laid out - had McGonagall gone back to save them, she might have made the world into more of a mess than it currently is. Was. Something. (You know, that whole butterfly theory thing.) --azriona From Aisbelmon at hotmail.com Mon Nov 29 10:02:14 2004 From: Aisbelmon at hotmail.com (M.Clifford) Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 10:02:14 -0000 Subject: Trusting characters Re: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118789 > Valky: > > What I felt I needed to say is that I don't think Sirius so much > > *gave up* the chance to die for James, as I recall his plan was to set himself as bait for the DE's to attack. > azriona: > Chp 10, PoA: > > McGonagall: "James Potter told Dumbledore that Black would die > rather than tell where they were, that Black was planning to go into hiding himself." > > I don't remember any quotes about Sirius wanting to act as bait - > besides, he had a full week to do it in after the the Charm was cast, > and he was still safe enough to go running around the countryside > checking on Peter's safety. Had he been bait, it would have been > pretty stupid to run straight to the real Secret Keeper. > Valky: I see your point, and unfortunately since I don't have my copy of POA here I can't give you the quote that I have been referring to. I recall it being in The Shrieking Shack scene during Sirius monologue explaining how Peter became secret keeper, the line goes something like "I expected that they (The DEs) would come after me, and not a weakling like Peter". From sunflowerlaw at cox.net Mon Nov 29 10:18:28 2004 From: sunflowerlaw at cox.net (Lindsay W.) Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 02:18:28 -0800 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Happy Birthday Bill In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <6.1.2.0.0.20041129014308.018e9758@pop.west.cox.net> No: HPFGUIDX 118790 Azriona writes: > > >Maybe, but I can think of more fun possibilities with the >reinterpretation of the Lost Prophecy, if they share the same >birthday...*rubs hands together in glee* Lawless replies: Oh gosh, I'd be rubbing my hands along with you - such marvelous possibilities! But we've already passed the July birthdays (she was announcing birthdays on her website before the 31st), so it seems highly unlikely that Snape shares a birthday with Harry - she would *have* to announce it, if she's mentioning McGonagall's and Flitwick's, as well. Or else it would look entirely suspicious, if we go the whole year, and Snape is never announced while others are. >Potioncat: >I'm still betting on a Scorpio birthday for Snape. Particularly >with his sarcastic touch. Lawless replies: D'oh, Nov. 22nd harkened the end of Scorpio birthdays, alas alas! I was rooting for Scorpio, too. :( I doubt Snape will be a Sagittarius - I could see the logic it, Sagittarius are supposed to be conflicted individuals (the centaur: human reason against the darker instincts of their horse half), but they tend to be generally bright, cheerful, optimistic people. Nah uh. Naw, my next big guess is Capricorn. Still be a winter baby - Dec. 22 - Jan. 20th. Oh gosh, Snape could be a *Christmas* baby. Or even better, New Years! Haha! Let's look at Capricorns, and see how well they fit into our perspective of ol' Snapey: "The Capricornian is generally a serious character possessing a wry sense of humor. Independent, steady as a rock, Capricorn reflects earthy qualities that range from clever to vacuous. Mostly cautious, confident, strong willed, reasonable and hard working, Capricorns are a rock upon which to build. They are often aloof, shrewd, practical, responsible and persevering. They are capable of great endurance; a whatever it takes, for as long as it takes persistence. Reliable in any profession they undertake, but lacking in originality, they usually excel in following up on what someone else has started. "Within prescribed areas, Capricorn is a resourceful, practical manager. These folks set high standards for themselves and others. They are self critical, and work well in a disciplined environment, demanding equal measure from their subordinates. A careful, ambitious planner, Capricorn moves forward with quiet, deliberate persistence. They can be frugal, possessing the ability to achieve results with minimum effort and expense. Highly organized, they excel in managing several projects simultaneously. "Capricorn will often vie for a position of authority. Once attaining control, they are demanding and exacting in leadership. Although firm, they are usually fair to people they deal with. They value tradition, the tried and true, more than innovation. "We always do it this way," was no doubt first said by a Capricorn. Their naturally pessimistic nature explains their wry sense of humor, which some think is no humor at all. They can spread gloom and tension in a minute and are quite capable of depressing everyone else around them. Never really up, but often down, they need a positive environment to enliven their spirits. "Capricorns tend to be profound thinkers. To them life is a serious business, and the need to be in control of it is paramount. They are seekers after knowledge and wisdom. Rational, logical and clearheaded, they have excellent concentration, and delight in all forms of debate. "In personal relationships they tend to be uncomfortable. Rather self-centered, they are wary and suspicious of others. They often have few close friends, but will maintain these bonds their entire life. They are loyal to intimates, but indifferent and sometimes callous to those outside their circle. Never impetuous, they consider business and personal relationships carefully before becoming involved. These are family people, and family usually comes first, except where business is their primary concern." (Source: http://www.elore.com/Astrology/Study/capricorn.htm) Eh eh? Almost to a peg, our favourite potions master. On top of that, Capricorns colours are black, grey and dark brown. Haha! Black robes, of course, but grey nightshirt, grey underpants, anyone? Oi oi! I'm sold. --Lawless They are loyal to intimates, but indifferent and sometimes callous to those outside their circle. Never impetuous, they consider business and personal relationships carefully before becoming involved. These are family people, and family usually comes first, except where business is their primary concern. From greatraven at hotmail.com Mon Nov 29 10:44:42 2004 From: greatraven at hotmail.com (sbursztynski) Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 10:44:42 -0000 Subject: Hermione's Time Turner In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118791 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Sharon" wrote: > > I had the impression that the Time Turner wasn't actually > McGonagall's own possession. She had to get permission, after all, > to allow Hermione to have one for classes, and Hermione had to > promise to use it *only* for classwork. > > Besides, had McGonagall used it to save the Potters, I don't know how > successful she would have been. Besides, there are laws against > actively changing the way history has been laid out - had McGonagall > gone back to save them, she might have made the world into more of a > mess than it currently is. Was. Something. > > (You know, that whole butterfly theory thing.) > > --azriona Sue: Quite right. Hermione tells Harry quite emphatically that they absolutely must NOT mess around with the past and DD warns them not to be seen by their earlier selves. All they can actually do,safely, is *make* history.Time travel is always a messy concept anyway. The Potters are dead, as are a whole lot of other people. If it was as simple as using a time turner, why not just go back and wipe out Tom Riddle? Where would it end? From Snarryfan at aol.com Mon Nov 29 10:47:21 2004 From: Snarryfan at aol.com (evita2fr) Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 10:47:21 -0000 Subject: Never say never In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118792 khinterberg wrote: > > Yahoo!Mort was not being very helpful to me and so I couldn't find if > there had been someting already said about this. But I was reading > the transcript of the World Book Day Chat 2004 and JKR said this: > > Jangles: Are you going to write books about Harry after school? > JK Rowling replies -> Probably not, but I'll never say never because > every time I do I immediately break the vow! > > > khinterberg Shhhh! I'll risk to apply that to Harry's "he would never forgive Snape" in OOTP :D Don't tempt me! Christelle From azriona at juno.com Mon Nov 29 11:25:11 2004 From: azriona at juno.com (Sharon) Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 11:25:11 -0000 Subject: Trusting characters Re: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118793 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "M.Clifford" wrote: > > > > Valky: > > > What I felt I needed to say is that I don't think Sirius so much > > > *gave up* the chance to die for James, as I recall his plan was > to set himself as bait for the DE's to attack. > > > > azriona: > > Chp 10, PoA: > > > > McGonagall: "James Potter told Dumbledore that Black would die > > rather than tell where they were, that Black was planning to go > into hiding himself." > > > > I don't remember any quotes about Sirius wanting to act as bait - > > besides, he had a full week to do it in after the the Charm was > cast, > > and he was still safe enough to go running around the countryside > > checking on Peter's safety. Had he been bait, it would have been > > pretty stupid to run straight to the real Secret Keeper. > > > > Valky: > I see your point, and unfortunately since I don't have my copy of > POA here I can't give you the quote that I have been referring to. > I recall it being in The Shrieking Shack scene during Sirius > monologue explaining how Peter became secret keeper, the line goes > something like "I expected that they (The DEs) would come after me, > and not a weakling like Peter". Opened right up to the scene, funnily enough. Is this the quote you mean? From Chp 19 PoA: "I thought it was the perfect plan...a bluff...Voldemort would be sure to come after me, would never dream they'd use a weak, talentless thing like you..." Yup, I can see how that could be interpreted as Sirius playing the decoy. It's an interesting idea, and one I hadn't thought of before - but I'm still curious why Sirius, if he was playing the decoy, went to check on Peter that night. As the decoy, you'd think he'd actually stay far away from Peter, particularly if he was worried that the DEs could catch him at any time. Why risk having them catch Peter as well, and thus end up with both the decoy *and* the real SK? --azriona From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com Mon Nov 29 11:28:12 2004 From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (arrowsmithbt) Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 11:28:12 -0000 Subject: Snape and Dumbledore [was Spy novel?] In-Reply-To: <20041128213009.63802.qmail@web53105.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118794 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Juli wrote: > Just like everything else we don't know about > Potterverse it's frustrating, we are all grown-ups > with jobs and busy schedules, and what do we do in our > spare time? We come up with theories about all our > unanswered questions. So, here's my theory: > > Snape has to trust DD just like everyone else because > it's his only option, Snape was at Voldemort's side > and he switched sides, why? No idea. But he started > working for DD, the only wizard who had any chance of > vanquishing LV (before we or anyone knew about the > prophecy), Snape may know the prophecy (my bet is he > does), so he tries in his own special way to keep > Harry safe. Back to DD, he's fought LV for 20 years > (or something), he knows him better than anyone and he > knows what LV is up to. Anyway, before I go on and on, > here's my point: Snape trusts DD because he has to, > just like DD trusts him, trust is a two-way street. > Trust. Ah, 'tis a precious thing and who we trust defines us, as DD didn't quite say. I've banged on about this before, but as you're fairly new to the site you haven't yet had a chance to get bored with Kneasy's vapourings. Still, we can soon put that right. Avid students of ole Nick Machiavelli will have no trouble recognising what's going on between Sevvy and DD. It's a classic example of the old dictum in action: "My enemy's enemy is my friend." With the usual rider "But that doesn't mean he'll be my friend for ever." Snape fits into the Order like a duck into a ballet troupe. They are not his natural friends or allies, they are not the sort of people he would normally associate with. And apart from DD the rest of the Order probably reciprocate his feelings. Were it not for DD's insistence they probably wouldn't touch him with a barge pole. (Interesting speculation here: suppose DD cops it in the neck. What would happen to the relationship between Snape and the Order? Would he be willing to take instructions from anyone else? Would anyone else trust him?) There've been lots of discussions on why Snapey switched and one of the speculations is that for some reason as yet unknown Snape is after revenge on Voldy. Voldy has done something to Snape, most probably involving his family, that Sevvy takes very personally indeed. It's possibly significant that Snape is still pally with the likes of Malfoy (though there are other theories about that) and seems to have no trouble with other DEs or ex-DEs like Karkaroff. He seems to make no apologies for the Slytherin mind-set or any antisocial attitudes they may espouse. His animus appears to be focussed on Voldy only. As you comment Snape and DD have to get along to achieve the downfall of Voldy, but unless one or both of them die in the struggle (high probability, I think), the aftermath would be fascinating to observe. Removing Voldy would not change that Slytherin mind-set; it didn't after the first Voldy war when nearly everybody thought he'd gone for good, so why should it next time? There will still be those who think Voldy had the right idea, they'll just be keeping a low profile until until yet another so-called 'Glorious Leader' turns up to rally the believers. Depressing thought. Be that as it may, the Sevvy/Albus axis is an alliance of convenience, individuals that in other circumstances would probably be opposed. Trust is necessary but is likely to be conditional not whole-hearted. So far as we can see DD has disappointed Snape over his response to the 'Prank' and gets close to doing so again at the end of PoA - hence Snape's reminder to him about Sirius trying to murder him. Trust is fragile in such circumstances; Snape is wondering why DD puts Sirius above himself. Snape, after all, appears to be a key player in the struggle; not so Sirius. Snape is peeved. If Snape sees, or thinks he sees an alternative way of savouring his revenge he might well go for it if DD is not keeping him happy or if Snape thinks he's not being appreciated to the extent he thinks he deserves. What fun! 'Course JKR won't let it go that far, she's more interested in those damn kids than in the convoluted machinations of a seriously devious mind. Pity. It'd be a plot development I'd relish. Kneasy From azriona at juno.com Mon Nov 29 11:34:54 2004 From: azriona at juno.com (Sharon) Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 11:34:54 -0000 Subject: Snape and Dumbledore [was Spy novel?] In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118795 Kneasy: > There've been lots of discussions on why Snapey switched and > one of the speculations is that for some reason as yet unknown > Snape is after revenge on Voldy. Just out of curiousity (since I'm still somewhat new over here), has there been any discussion about the possibility that Snape was never a Death Eater in the truest sense of the term, but has been working for DD since Day One, and joined the DE in order to become a spy for DD? It's a theory that a friend and I came up with a while ago, just to play with, but I haven't done a lot of research into the possibilities, and I'm curious if anyone else thinks it's viable or not. --azriona From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com Mon Nov 29 11:50:39 2004 From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (arrowsmithbt) Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 11:50:39 -0000 Subject: Snape and Dumbledore [was Spy novel?] In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118796 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Sharon" wrote: > > Just out of curiousity (since I'm still somewhat new over here), has > there been any discussion about the possibility that Snape was never > a Death Eater in the truest sense of the term, but has been working > for DD since Day One, and joined the DE in order to become a spy for > DD? > > It's a theory that a friend and I came up with a while ago, just to > play with, but I haven't done a lot of research into the > possibilities, and I'm curious if anyone else thinks it's viable or > not. Not that I'm aware of. Mind you, there could be a full exposition of Linear B, the resting place of the Holy Grail and the true identity of the eaves-dropper somewhere in the back files. The trick is getting Yahoo!Mort to disgorge them. So why not reveal your reasoning? Tell us all. If, as most hope, the 6th book will be released next summer, there's likely to be a last minute tidal wave of theories trying to beat Jo to the punch. Post now and avoid the rush. Kneasy From Aisbelmon at hotmail.com Mon Nov 29 11:55:53 2004 From: Aisbelmon at hotmail.com (M.Clifford) Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 11:55:53 -0000 Subject: Trusting characters Re: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118797 Azriona: > Opened right up to the scene, funnily enough. Is this the quote you mean? From Chp 19 PoA: > > "I thought it was the perfect plan...a bluff...Voldemort would be > sure to come after me, would never dream they'd use a weak, > talentless thing like you..." > > Yup, I can see how that could be interpreted as Sirius playing the > decoy. It's an interesting idea, and one I hadn't thought of before - > but I'm still curious why Sirius, if he was playing the decoy, went > to check on Peter that night. As the decoy, you'd think he'd > actually stay far away from Peter, particularly if he was worried > that the DEs could catch him at any time. Why risk having them catch Peter as well, and thus end up with both the decoy *and* the real SK? > Valky: You are making perfect sense to me, I guess I can't really give any answer to that. 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 From willsonkmom at msn.com Mon Nov 29 12:34:21 2004 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 12:34:21 -0000 Subject: Trusting characters Re: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118798 > > Valky: > You are making perfect sense to me, I guess I can't really give any > answer to that. > 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. From mgrantwich at yahoo.com Mon Nov 29 13:53:39 2004 From: mgrantwich at yahoo.com (Magda Grantwich) Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 05:53:39 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041129135340.19499.qmail@web53110.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 118799 > > Valky: > Vindictive, I would choose, since you bring up Sevvie being bitten > and turned into a werewolf. He may have arrogantly believed that it > would teach Humility to young Snape, who obviously thinks and > always > thought himself better than Remus by some prejudicial and unfound > reasoning. Would you like to find some canon evidence for that last sweeping statement? Magda __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From naama_gat at hotmail.com Mon Nov 29 14:06:31 2004 From: naama_gat at hotmail.com (naamagatus) Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 14:06:31 -0000 Subject: Trusting characters Re: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118800 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "M.Clifford" wrote: > > Azriona: > > Opened right up to the scene, funnily enough. Is this the quote > you mean? From Chp 19 PoA: > > > > "I thought it was the perfect plan...a bluff...Voldemort would be > > sure to come after me, would never dream they'd use a weak, > > talentless thing like you..." > > > > Yup, I can see how that could be interpreted as Sirius playing the > > decoy. It's an interesting idea, and one I hadn't thought of > before - > > but I'm still curious why Sirius, if he was playing the decoy, > went > > to check on Peter that night. As the decoy, you'd think he'd > > actually stay far away from Peter, particularly if he was worried > > that the DEs could catch him at any time. Why risk having them > catch Peter as well, and thus end up with both the decoy *and* the > real SK? > > > > Valky: > You are making perfect sense to me, I guess I can't really give any > answer to that. > 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 Why not accept what Sirius said? He was worried when he hadn't heard from Peter. It was imperative to find out whether Peter was captured - since Peter was the Secret Keeper, he was the only one who could endanger the Potters. And who else could have been sent to check on Peter? The Potters were the target, so they certainly couldn't leave their hiding place, and Lupin wasn't trusted. It had to be Sirius. And if Peter had been captured, there's obviously no need for Sirius to continue being the decoy and remain in hiding. Naama From azriona at juno.com Mon Nov 29 16:30:58 2004 From: azriona at juno.com (Sharon) Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 16:30:58 -0000 Subject: Trusting characters Re: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118801 >Valky: >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 > Azriona (me): Gee, you're asking me to say Sirius was cocky? Okay! I'm first in line!!! *grin* Absolutely, it was important for Sirius to be first on the scene at GH for plot purposes - I can't fault JKR for that decision, because it was a good one. However, she's very rarely made a decision that she wasn't able to back up later on with some amount of fact. (Mark Evans being a notable exception to the rule.) So I would have to agree with Potioncat's response, as follows: >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. > *Because* it was necessary for Sirius to show up to GH first, it was necessary for him to have a reason. What better one than making it simply part of his character, to rush into situations where he doesn't know the dangers and can't guaruntee an outcome? Even had Sirius really planned on going into hiding to protect James and Lily - he never would have been content to remain in one place. He was at Grimmauld Place for all of a month an a half and he was chomping at the bit to get out of there - and every time we saw him in OoP he was progressively more depressed. It's no wonder that after a single week of playing whatever game he was playing (either hiding in secret or open air, trying to lure the DEs to him) that he went off to Peter's place to find him. >Naama: >Why not accept what Sirius said? He was worried when he hadn't heard from Peter. It was imperative to find out whether Peter was captured - since Peter was the Secret Keeper, he was the only one who could endanger the Potters. > Hi, Naama! I'm actually looking forward to our stand-offs now... Something I just discovered this evening, which might interest you: Chp 19 PoA, Sirius: "The night [James and Lily] died, I'd arranged to check on Peter, make sure he was still safe..." It wasn't a spur of the moment thing. Sirius wasn't just dropping by because he'd suddenly had a bad feeling, or because he was getting antsy. He wasn't even feeling particularly worried about Peter when he went to look for him, until after he'd arrived. Why? Because he'd *planned* to be there - and what's more, Peter *knew* that Sirius would be stopping by. (Who else would Sirius have "arranged" the meeting with, the Easter Bunny?) Pretending I'm Sirius for a moment: I have, on schedule, showed up at the SK's house, who isn't there. Maybe I wait around for a few minutes, thinking perhaps Peter has popped out for a drink or a loaf of bread. But time goes by, and Peter's still gone, and I'm getting worried, and then my Spidey-sense starts tingling...and I go straight to GH. To find it a ruined mass of burnt lumber.... Now, it's all well and good if Sirius wanted to see if Peter had been captured. But if that was the case, why did he go to GH first? Why didn't he go to Dumbledore? "Yo, Dumbledude, we screwed up and Peter's captured, I think." At that point, Sirius wasn't worried about Peter - he was worried about James and Lily. (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?) >Naama: >And who else could have been sent to check on Peter? The Potters were the target, so they certainly couldn't leave their hiding place, and Lupin wasn't trusted. It had to be Sirius. And if Peter had been captured, there's obviously no need for Sirius to continue being the decoy and remain in hiding. > True, very true. Sirius was in the free and clear to run around like crazy once he knew Peter had been compromised. But being a decoy and remaining in hiding are two entirely different things: being a decoy involves being *seen* by the enemy, to lure them in a different direction. Hiding involves staying low, staying out of sight, staying safe. Sirius had to have been doing one or the other - and we have two sources telling us different things. McGonagall says that Sirius was hiding. Sirius says that he was the decoy. It all comes down to who you trust - and I don't think I've made much of a secret who I believe. --azriona From azriona at juno.com Mon Nov 29 16:42:39 2004 From: azriona at juno.com (Sharon) Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 16:42:39 -0000 Subject: Snape and Dumbledore [was Spy novel?] In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118802 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "arrowsmithbt" wrote: > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Sharon" wrote: > > > > Just out of curiousity (since I'm still somewhat new over here), has > > there been any discussion about the possibility that Snape was never > > a Death Eater in the truest sense of the term, but has been working > > for DD since Day One, and joined the DE in order to become a spy for > > DD? > > > > It's a theory that a friend and I came up with a while ago, just to > > play with, but I haven't done a lot of research into the > > possibilities, and I'm curious if anyone else thinks it's viable or > > not. > > Not that I'm aware of. > Mind you, there could be a full exposition of Linear B, the resting > place of the Holy Grail and the true identity of the eaves-dropper > somewhere in the back files. > The trick is getting Yahoo!Mort to disgorge them. > > So why not reveal your reasoning? > Tell us all. > If, as most hope, the 6th book will be released next summer, there's > likely to be a last minute tidal wave of theories trying to beat Jo to > the punch. > Post now and avoid the rush. > > Kneasy Well, I'll try, but it'll take a day or so, because I can't remember what our evidence was (assuming we had any - we mainly come up with absurd theories just to make time at work go faster - this one just wasn't all that absurd). I'll work on it and post it as soon as it's done. --azriona From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Mon Nov 29 18:22:31 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 18:22:31 -0000 Subject: Choosing sides In-Reply-To: <8BB6C942-414D-11D9-8E13-000A9577CB94@btconnect.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118803 Kneasy [with heavy snippage, but still probably not enough]: > I see disagreement looming; never mind, it'll all add to the fun, > I hate it when too many fans agree with me, it shows I'm slipping. > > Naturally, his being dumped on the Dursleys was not his decision, > it was DD's. And since I'm a staunch advocate of Puppetmaster!DD I > think it quite possible that planting that cuckoo in that > particular nest killed a number of birds with one stone. Two are > pretty obvious (the need for blood protection and the wish to > prevent him being 'spoiled') but I contend there's at least one > other and it didn't come to fruition for ten years. > > Consider - if Harry had had a happy life among the Muggles, if all > were sweetness and light with caring guardians, lots of friends at > school, etc, would he have been so keen to jump into the unknown > world of wizards? If, for example, Vernon had been the exact > opposite of what he is, if Harry had come to like, even love and > respect him, and Vernon had then advised him not to take up the > invitation to Hogwarts DD would have been in a pretty pickle. And > even if he did make the choice to step into a total unknown, would > he have had the necessary self-reliance and resilience to be > successful? Probably not IMO. > > Some may point to Hermione in a counter argument; here's a Muggle- > born who jumped at the chance of switching worlds. Little miss > bossy boots, Hectoring!Hermione. Just how many friends did she have > in the Muggle world? Not many, I'll bet. > > Anyway, back to Harry. There's a comment I passed a couple of days > ago (and that Carol agreed with to a certain extent) that some, > perhaps many choices are made not through high principles but > because of where people you like/dislike already stand. And as > things stood at the start of PS/SS it would be more or less > guaranteed that Harry would choose the opposite option to any that > Vernon favoured. > > Whatever - with Vernon as unwitting recruiting sergeant it's no > surprise that Harry leaps at the chance to get out. And it's not > long before he makes another choice based on personal antipathy - > Draco Malfoy. The encounter in Madam Malkin's provides the basis > for their future inter-actions. Harry decides he doesn't like Draco > before he knows anything about purebloods, Slytherin House or it's > association with Voldy. It's a purely personal reaction. > > But not satisfied with that, Jo works it a third time - Snape. If > that first Potions lesson had gone differently - what? Being the > sort of teacher ole Sevvy is it's unlikely that Harry would ever > actually like him, but it probably wouldn't have degenerated into > outright hate. A reaction on the personal level once again has long- > term effects for Harry. And no, I don't believe Snape hates Harry. > Doesn't like him much, that's for sure, probably never will, but I > doubt it goes as far as hate. In fact it wouldn't surprise me if > sometimes Snape retires to his dungeon and laughs his socks off at > how easy it is to jerk Harry's chain. Predictable!Potter. > > Note that Harry never (until the climax of OoP) makes a conscious > decision to confront Voldy. Throughout the books he keeps > tripping over him unexpectedly and Voldy tries to blow his head off > with boring regularity, not to say ineptitude. All Harry's > interested in is getting out from under; actually facing down the > epitome of evil is the last thing on his mind. He's reacting to > Voldy - the killer of his parents and four-time aspirant for > handing Harry the Black Spot - in terms of his own experiences > rather than philosophical principles. It's personal. > > And it will continue to be so, at least with some of his betes > noir, I think. Only next time, in HPB it's likely he'll have to > think about what he's doing, why he's doing it and what the > consequences are likely to be in much wider terms. We all do it > eventually. It's called growing up. > > The choices made from now on really will show what he's made of. SSSusan: Kneasy knows that I'm one who has disagreed with him in the past about choice, and I'm sure I do still see *more* of an element of choice within those limited choices than he sees, perhaps because I don't believe as much in Puppetmaster!DD [I see more of a GrandPlanner!DD than fully Puppetmaster!DD, if that distinction makes sense]. Anyway, I find that I do agree with lots that's been said here in spite of a somewhat different outlook on DD and choice up to this point. Especially, I had not thought of the point that DD may have liked the notion of the Dursleys precisely because it would more likely put Harry into the frame of mind of *wanting* to skeedaddle into the WW. Also, I think it's quite right to point out the difference between Harry & Hermione's situations that way -- she likely focused equally on her studying/learning/achieving no matter which world she was in and drove everyone nuts in both. I also happen to agree strongly with the idea that Harry reacted *against* what he'd seen in the Dursleys and what he sensed in Draco. Awhile back Del wondered how it could have been that Harry could have made those "good" choices in the first place--how could someone whose upbringing had been so traumatic and awful even know to reach out towards the good choice? That's where the thread turned all psychology-y [which of course you don't fancy, Kneasy], but it appears that we're in the same place in the end in that we think it makes sense for Harry to have chosen *against* what he'd seen and experienced. Yes, lots of people end up following the path they've been shown and Harry might've become yet another Dursley. But others, of which Harry is one, clearly look outward for other models of behavior, for other worldviews beyond the garbage they've been shown. So when Harry met Draco and saw a bit of a Dursley therein, he wanted no part of him. Makes sense to me. I like the conclusion of this post very much. Whether we think Harry's had some true choice or that it's mostly been foisted upon him by DD [or chance], at least at this point it reallly *does* appear that choice will be more *fully* choice from here on in. Let's hope so!! Siriusly Snapey Susan, who loves the image of Snape snorting over how easy it was to jerk Potter's chain. Easy to picture. From griffin782002 at yahoo.com Mon Nov 29 18:53:02 2004 From: griffin782002 at yahoo.com (sp. sot.) Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 10:53:02 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Hogwarts letters Re: Choosing sides In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041129185302.11544.qmail@web52707.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 118804 Sharon wrote: Not only that, but who paid the 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 would think that Tom himself would receive the letter - after all, Harry's letters were made out to him, not to Petunia & Vernon, who were after all his legal guardians. I believe also that JKR has said that in the cases of Muggle-born children, a witch or wizard is sent to explain to the parents the meaning of the letter. This makes me think that something similar would have happened in Tom's case, to explain to the people in charge of the orphanage about Tom's special situation. --azriona Griffin782002 now: I wonder if Tom's mother had a vault just like Harry's parents. And I too wonder how he paid for books and other stuff without a scholarship. Perhaps someone from the Orphanage? Griffin782002 who is going to spend a few days in London, before returning home for Christmas, in a hotel near Kings Cross station!!!!! 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!? Take Yahoo! Mail with you! Get it on your mobile phone. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Mon Nov 29 18:56:51 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 18:56:51 -0000 Subject: Knowing it was Snape (was: What has Snape seen) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118805 Justcarol: > BTW, we do know that the teenage boy stunning flies is Snape. Harry > recognizes him, as he does not recognize the hook-nosed man in the > scene with the angry father. SSSusan: I recognize that I'm piping up here as a LOON, but I think it's a point worth making. I don't think we can know *either* whether the teenage boy or the hook-nosed man is Snape, no matter how likely these may seem to be, because what we "know" here is based upon Harry's *recognition* or *not-recognition*. 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. Siriusly Snapey Susan From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Mon Nov 29 19:06:57 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 19:06:57 -0000 Subject: Choosing sides In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118806 Del: > Harry often tends to make decisions based on a *limited* number of > elements. Slytherin is racist and breeds more evil wizards than > other Houses ? Evil, I won't go there. I had a dream that Sirius is > being tortured at the DoM and my previous dream was right ? I'm > going. Even when people try to present him with counter-arguments, > he doesn't listen. I don't call that making real choices : I call > that jumping to conclusions. SSSusan: Sure they're choices! They're impulsive, incomplete or poorly thought out choices -- not what we necessarily hope for from our hero nor from our kids as parents -- but they're choices nonetheless. :-) Siriusly Snapey Susan From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Mon Nov 29 19:19:39 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 19:19:39 -0000 Subject: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118807 Carol: > Surely this is not the same James we hear > calling to Lily that he'll hold off Voldemort while she takes Harry > and runs? The James who died trying to fight for his family is > admirable and courageous. The James who bullied Severus for the > entertainment of his bored friend is arrogant and egotistical. James > did a lot of growing up, IMO, in the years between the Pensieve > incident and Godric's Hollow. Alla: > > Untill Sirius is PROVEN to be a liar, I will take his testimony > > seriously, I see no reason not to. > > > > I even take his testimony about Snape to be true, but I > > understand why others may not want to, but not to take his words > > about James as truthful? I see absolutely no reason why. Carol responds: > For the record, I wasn't calling Sirius a liar. We all interpret > events and other people's motives from our own perspective and see > the past through the filter of the present. So I think Sirius is > dating James's opposition to the Dark Arts to an earlier period > than is likely, in part because James was later a strong opponent > of Voldemort and in part because Sirius himself hated the Dark Arts > from an early age because of his family. I think he believes that > his feelings and James's feelings were more similar than they > really were. SSSusan: I've stayed out of this thread on purpose, but I just have to ask this. WHY should we look at it this way? That is, WHY should be assume that Sirius is dating James' opposition to the Dark Arts to an earlier point than it really existed? I think it actually makes MORE sense, given what you're pointing to in the first paragraph above about the strength of James's actions in the GH scene, for his aversion to the DA to have been LONG-held. Carol: > 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. Siriusly Snapey Susan From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Mon Nov 29 19:32:58 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 19:32:58 -0000 Subject: Trio Rising (was Re: McGonagall in OOTP ) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118808 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "lupinlore" wrote: Oh, I certainly agree that McGonagall does what she can within the bounds of her character. But that is precisely my point. Look, let's go at this another way. One problem any author faces who wants to write an adventure story featuring kids is what to do with the adults. To put it simply, if the adults in the story act the way they should, then the adventure can't happen since the kids can't get into the kind of dangerous situations the adventure requires. Now, there are a couple of ways to deal with this. The first, and most common I suppose, is to send the kids somewhere where there ARE no adults. This is the tack Madeleine L'Engle takes in "A Wrinkle in Time" and C.S. Lewis employs in "The Lion, The Witch, and the Wardrobe." The other option is to make the adults fundamentally incompetent, if not downright malicious. This is the tack JKR takes. The adults, by and large, aren't evil -- but they are flawed in ways that cripple them at key points in the plot. Thus Snape is too bitter, McGonagall too stern and unbending, Dumbledore too detached, Sirius too erratic, and Remus too passive to really step in and do their "job" as adults at crucial moments in the HP saga, particularly in OOTP. And therein, I think, lies the interest in the trio. The adults are all, in some sense, "finished products." Although one cannot preclude growth and change, still there is a sense in which the adults have already realized what potential they might have had. They can't really aspire to be that much better than they already are. If they could, the story would be about them, which it ain't. The trio, on the other hand, is in a sense potential incarnate. Sure they aren't perfect and will never be perfect, but they have every possibility of rising above the adults and surpassing them. Thus Ron is interesting because he can surpass Remus and avoid the trap of passivity, self-doubt, and "second-fiddleness" that is such a problem for the adult. Hermione has the chance to grow beyond the flaws that so incapacitated McGonagall at key moments in OOTP. And Harry is much more interesting than Snape because he has the potential to be so much greater than Severus, and yes, to move beyond the flaws that Dumbledore has evinced. Any coming of age story is about the changing of eras. As the trio comes of age, they will almost certainly surpass the adults in key ways (although not, obviously, in all ways as of yet). I would not be surprised to see examples of this in the upcoming books. There is a somewhat sad counter-trend, however. The era of the trio is dawning, but that means the time of the adults is passing. The adults, simply because they ARE adults in a series where the heroes are the kids, are doomed to be falling stars. Merlin must vanish so that Arthur can take ascendancy, Gandalf and Bilbo fade away to leave center stage to Frodo and Sam, and Obi-Wan falls so that Luke can rise to his destiny. In a similar way Dumbledore, Remus, McGonagall, and Snape, although they certainly have important roles yet to play, must inevitably decline so that Harry, Ron, and Hermione can come into their own. Alla: You are quickly becoming one of my most favourite debaters on list, Lupinlore. :) You make great points and I think that most likely you are going to be right in you assessment, but I suppose I am still too optimistic at this point in series. Now, I happily concede that in general you are right even as of today. In order for kids to play first parts in the story, adults should be either idiots or not to exist at all. They ARE majorly flawed, they ARE just supporting elements in Harry's story, which I am VERY interested in, BUT my optimism, maybe naive optimism is based on the fact that I consider Rowling to be very GOOD writer ( no not the GREATEST, but very GOOD, STRONG writer). Accordingly, I hope that her "coming out of age" series will manage to become not TYPICAL out of age series, in a sense that some adults characters will be able to progress at least marginally. Like for example, my long advocated change in Snape's character at the end ( NO, not the excuse for what he does , but change). He is a very smart man, he should be able to figure out one day that Harry is NOT his father. I don't think that such change will compromise kids playing the major parts in the story, but it will also give me my long desired closure for Snape character. Let's take Remus, for example. As someone who does not believe in ESE! Remus, I believe that there is still time for Remus to step up to the plate and be less passive character, even if it will reflect only in him being more involved with Harry's training and with Harry's well- being in general. Yes, indeed Trio has the chance to become much better people than previous generation was and most likely they will be, but for now - they are just that - children. One of the reasons I love Harry's character so much because he had been through enormous amount of pain, so on emotional level I just want everything to be better for him, but if his pain was not so real, but more "cartoonish"(for example if his main worries were his grades at school), I don't know, I am not sure if I would liked his character so much. I also think that Ron is well developed character, but even Hermione is still lacking in characterisation, IMO. I think another child character, who I could have love as much as I love Harry's could have been Neville, if only Rowling would have developed him more. From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Mon Nov 29 19:32:42 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 19:32:42 -0000 Subject: Choosing sides In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118809 Nora wrote : "But I don't think it's quite accurate to strike such a strict dichotomy as you're wanting to." Del replies : I'm not wanting to. I'm just bothered by that general assumption that Muggleborns are all so happy to discover they are wizards that they all happily jump into the WW. I see absolutely no reason why this should be so. Nora wrote : "Then there is the other factor, that magic is pretty amazing, and may well trump the other talents that a kid is showing." Del replies : That would be the only thing that would make sense to me. But I don't like the way it completely reduces a kid's choice : no matter what else he might be or want to be, it's Hogwarts and the WW for him. 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 replies : 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. Del From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Mon Nov 29 19:36:45 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 19:36:45 -0000 Subject: Hogwarts letters Re: Choosing sides In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118810 Alla wrote : " 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." 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. Del From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Mon Nov 29 19:44:12 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 19:44:12 -0000 Subject: Hogwarts letters Re: Choosing sides In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118811 > Del replies : I don't see it exactly like that. From the way it looks, Muggleborns just trade one world for another. Alla: Well, I did say that the analogy is not exact, but I still think that in a sense of developing their talents - the analogy holds. In Shaun's story I think the analogy is even more precise. From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Mon Nov 29 19:43:06 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 19:43:06 -0000 Subject: Hogwarts letters Re: Choosing sides In-Reply-To: <41AB3D5A.18638.15D6BC4@localhost> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118812 Shaun wrote : " It's not the same situation as having magical ability in the HP universe, but a lot of these kids are not formally identified until quite late in their childhoods - age 8 or older is not uncommon, some not until their early teens. But many, many of them prior to formal identification display tendencies that are 'different' or 'concerning' to parents. And I can certainly see a possibility that happens with muggle parents of wizarding kids in the HP universe." Del replies : I don't think it is similar. First, a highly gifted kid is highly gifted 24/7. A magical kid oozes magic only once in a while, usually when stressed. Second, a highly gifted kid can't stop being highly gifted, and live as a non-gifted kid. A magical kid could learn to master his magic and live as a Muggle, as far as we know. I don't remember that we are ever told in the books that magical kids who don't receive a magical education suffer severe emotional problems. I could be wrong though. Del From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Mon Nov 29 19:48:52 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 19:48:52 -0000 Subject: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118813 > 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. Alla: Oh, Susan, I wish you would not stay out of this thread. :o) I agree absolutely. Wonderful nickname for James, by the way. He was a jerk, nobody disputes it, but I also see no reason to deny him ideological convictions at the age of fifteen, because I think teenagers are pretty capable of having them and I still think that there are hints that he did hated Dark Arts always. From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Mon Nov 29 19:48:28 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 19:48:28 -0000 Subject: Hogwarts letters Re: Choosing sides In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118814 Snow wrote : "I realize where you are approaching this from but you seem not to be taking into account the fact that this magical tendency that appears abruptly, without notification can be scary to the child and/or his peers, which could cause him to feel like a freak, different or unusual and therefore not be accepted to join the main stream. " Del replies : You could be right, but it's still just speculation. We aren't told of any Muggleborn kid who suffered that way, if I remember well. Snow wrote : " The child has not lost a world but added a world. Unless the parent abandons the child to the magical world, what has the child lost? " Del replies : >From what we see with Hermione, it's rather the other way around : it's the magical child who abandons the Muggle world. Let's face it : without any kind of Muggle secondary education (no maths, no English, no history, no *nothing*), Muggleborns simply cannot fit into the Muggle society. They can do their best to catch up, but they have to want it. Hogwarts *in effect* cuts them from the Muggle World. Del From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Mon Nov 29 19:52:41 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 19:52:41 -0000 Subject: Choosing sides In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118815 SSSusan wrote : " Yes, lots of people end up following the path they've been shown and Harry might've become yet another Dursley. But others, of which Harry is one, clearly look outward for other models of behavior, for other worldviews beyond the garbage they've been shown." Del replies : Reading your post made me realise something : could it be that Harry didn't stick to the Dursley model simply because it was *inconsistent*? He could see that he was treated differently than Dudley and of course he didn't like it because he was systematically on the wrong end of that system. But what if he had been treated the same way as Dudley ? What if the Dursleys had been consistent in their treatment of the 2 boys ? Can we be sure that Harry would have rejected that model, and Draco because of it ? Del From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com Mon Nov 29 20:12:07 2004 From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (arrowsmithbt) Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 20:12:07 -0000 Subject: Choosing sides In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118816 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "cubfanbudwoman" wrote: > Kneasy knows that I'm one who has disagreed with him in the past > about choice, and I'm sure I do still see *more* of an element of > choice within those limited choices than he sees, perhaps because I > don't believe as much in Puppetmaster!DD [I see more of a > GrandPlanner!DD than fully Puppetmaster!DD, if that distinction makes > sense]. Anyway, I find that I do agree with lots that's been said > here in spite of a somewhat different outlook on DD and choice up to > this point. > > enormous snip> > > I like the conclusion of this post very much. Whether we think > Harry's had some true choice or that it's mostly been foisted upon > him by DD [or chance], at least at this point it reallly *does* > appear that choice will be more *fully* choice from here on in. > Let's hope so!! > > Siriusly Snapey Susan, who loves the image of Snape snorting over how > easy it was to jerk Potter's chain. Easy to picture. Good grief! Put out more flags! SSS has given the nod to a bit of Kneasy sneaky thinking. Well, it's obviously a case of great minds thinking alike. Mind you I'm a bit worried about it, I'm seriously going to have to increase the unacceptability quotient in my next few posts; can't have everyone agreeing with me, t'ain't natural. Yeah, it's a nice picture, Snape chortling into his porringer of gruel, reminiscing on winding young Potter up. I did start a TBAY type piece based on Snape's diary. Must get around to finishing it one of these days. It is, of course, totally unacceptable to canon purists. But I like it. Kneasy From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Mon Nov 29 20:17:38 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 20:17:38 -0000 Subject: Trusting characters Re: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118817 Naama: > >Why not accept what Sirius said? He was worried when he hadn't > > heard from Peter. It was imperative to find out whether Peter was > > captured - since Peter was the Secret Keeper, he was the only one > > who could endanger the Potters. Azriona: > It wasn't a spur of the moment thing. Sirius wasn't just dropping > by because he'd suddenly had a bad feeling, or because he was > getting antsy. He wasn't even feeling particularly worried about > Peter when he went to look for him, until after he'd arrived. > Why? Because he'd *planned* to be there - and what's more, Peter > *knew* that Sirius would be stopping by. > > Pretending I'm Sirius for a moment: I have, on schedule, showed up > at the SK's house, who isn't there. Maybe I wait around for a few > minutes, thinking perhaps Peter has popped out for a drink or a > loaf of bread. But time goes by, and Peter's still gone, and I'm > getting worried, and then my Spidey-sense starts tingling...and I > go straight to GH. To find it a ruined mass of burnt lumber.... > > Now, it's all well and good if Sirius wanted to see if Peter had > been captured. But if that was the case, why did he go to GH > first? Why didn't he go to Dumbledore? "Yo, Dumbledude, we > screwed up and Peter's captured, I think." SSSusan: Why not go to DD first? Why not wait around at Peter's a couple of hours longer? Because it's *war* and so much is at stake! Sirius *is* a rash, impulsive kind of guy. In his shoes, I can't imagine why one would NOT rush off to the site where the most potential damage could have occurred, to ascertain whether James, Lily & Harry are still safe. IF they are safe, then start worrying about what's held Peter up, perhaps contact DD. IF something's gone wrong, maybe Sirius hopes he can get to GH in time to help fight off Voldy -- or to tell James & Lily to get out or be on the lookout -- or even to help them if they're hurt but not dead. Any number of possibilities comes to mind. Rushing off to DD *first* would only delay in a situation where every second could be vitally important [as we now know it was]. Besides, as DD says, the Order has means of communicating with one another that we don't yet know about. Perhaps Sirius was ringin' DD on the cell phone on his way to GH. ;-) azriona: > But being a decoy and remaining in hiding are two entirely > different things: being a decoy involves being *seen* by the enemy, > to lure them in a different direction. SSSusan: Yes, but one doesn't have to walk right out into the open on the first available day. [Even Voldy might not be *that* thick.] James & Lily are hiding, Peter's supposed to be protecting them. Sirius wants to be the decoy, but why NOT bide his time as long as possible in the process? Maybe they were hoping Voldy wouldn't make his move 'til the Order was a bit more prepared, and that's why Sirius wasn't being a totally open decoy just yet. Siriusly Snapey Susan, not buying the ESE!Sirius thing at all. From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Mon Nov 29 20:34:20 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 20:34:20 -0000 Subject: Choosing sides In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118818 SSSusan wrote : > > " Yes, lots of people end up following the path they've been > > shown and Harry might've become yet another Dursley. But others, > > of which Harry is one, clearly look outward for other models of > > behavior, for other worldviews beyond the garbage they've been > > shown." Del replies : > Reading your post made me realise something : could it be that Harry > didn't stick to the Dursley model simply because it was > *inconsistent*? He could see that he was treated differently than > Dudley and of course he didn't like it because he was systematically > on the wrong end of that system. > > But what if he had been treated the same way as Dudley ? What if the > Dursleys had been consistent in their treatment of the 2 boys ? Can > we be sure that Harry would have rejected that model, and Draco > because of it ? SSSusan: Good question. I don't think we can be *sure* of anything -- there is too much of one's individual nature to take into account -- but I think you're right about the *likelihood* of what would have happened. If Harry'd been treated the same as Dudley, with the resultant consistency you mention, then I'd think the odds of his turning out a pampered little prince would've been greater, yes. *I* happen to think that part of it, too, is that Harry is fairly introspective. Hang on, hang on -- don't hoot me down just yet! I mean introspective for a kid of 9, 10, 11. I'm sure he didn't like Dudley getting all the goodies & affection, but I'm guessing he also spent some time *thinking* in his little cupboard about life in general and about what jerks the Dursleys were. They didn't care a whit about anyone besides themselves, and that may have bugged Harry in & of itself and caused him to look outward for other examples of ways of behaving & believing. All speculation, of course, but that's my view of it. :-) Siriusly Snapey Susan From nadinesaintamour at hotmail.com Mon Nov 29 20:43:21 2004 From: nadinesaintamour at hotmail.com (catimini15) Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 20:43:21 -0000 Subject: Knowing it was Snape (was: What has Snape seen) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118819 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "cubfanbudwoman" wrote: (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 ? Nadine From ginnysthe1 at yahoo.com Mon Nov 29 20:46:17 2004 From: ginnysthe1 at yahoo.com (ginnysthe1) Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 20:46:17 -0000 Subject: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118820 Ces wrote: I agree with you [Kim] about what passes for "normal" at Hogwarts! I think we must have a slanted view on things. I do hope we get to find out eventually what (if any) punishment Black got for what he did to Snape, but I wonder if we will. After Harry went to Remus and Sirius for answers about what he saw in the pensieve, that was the time for those two to speak up and admit that what happened was wrong. I think it's past time for Harry to find out his father was not perfect and that Snape isn't to blame for everything that happened. That was the time for a long talk with Harry about both his parents and the actions of all the Marauders during their time at school. I still have a feeling, deep down inside me, that while James and Sirius professed to hate the dark arts, that didn't stop them from having some sort of contact with Voldemort after school - sort of black marketeers. I'm probably totally off base, but it's my gut feeling. Hi Ces (et al.)! Kim here now: IIRC, Harry did get an eye-opener about his father from watching the pensieve scene and seeing how badly James and Sirius behaved towards Severus. I think Harry does react negatively to the behavior of his father and Sirius, both of whom he had previously idolized in his own mind. My sense was that Harry developed a little sympathy for Professor Snape as a result. Your (Ces's) idea in your second paragraph, that James and Sirius might have had some "black market" contact with Voldemort after they graduated from school, is really interesting. It makes me wonder too about the details of day-to-day WW life under Voldemort's reign of terror. Eventually the "terror" sent Lily and James (and baby Harry of course) into hiding, fearing for their lives, but what had gone on before then? Like where had they met Voldemort before so as to have had those 3 battles with him ("thrice defied")? The Longbottoms had also battled LV 3 times, and I wonder about the details of their relationship with Voldemort, before he finally "crucio'ed" them into insanity. Voldemort's reign lasted about 10 years, right, and obviously it greatly affected the lives of wizards/witches, not to mention the muggles that were killed. Who was Voldemort during those years -- the self-appointed minster of magic? Where did he live? What else did he do with his time, besides sneaking around with his henchmen and zapping people with Avada Kedavras? I don't remember reading many details about those 10 years in canon, but there might be little clues sticking out here and there that would be worth speculating about... Cheers, Kim (who wishes she didn't have so many other things she has to do and could spend a whole day a week just looking up stuff in the books) From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Mon Nov 29 20:53:15 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 20:53:15 -0000 Subject: Knowing it was Snape (was: What has Snape seen) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118821 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! From Lynx412 at AOL.com Mon Nov 29 20:56:15 2004 From: Lynx412 at AOL.com (Lynx412 at AOL.com) Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 15:56:15 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] Trusting characters Re: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs Message-ID: <147.39f2268e.2edce6ef@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 118822 In a message dated 11/29/2004 3:27:06 PM Eastern Standard Time, susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net writes: > SSSusan: > Yes, but one doesn't have to walk right out into the open on the > first available day. [Even Voldy might not be *that* thick.] James > &Lily are hiding, Peter's supposed to be protecting them. Sirius > wants to be the decoy, but why NOT bide his time as long as possible > in the process? Maybe they were hoping Voldy wouldn't make his > move 'til the Order was a bit more prepared, and that's why Sirius > wasn't being a totally open decoy just yet. I agree with this thought. Sirius & crew were supposed to be in hiding, soldiers in a war. Someone they knew was passing info to the enemy. The group had to pick their hiding spot & a secret-keeper. DD volunteered, but James, trusting his best friend, chose otherwise. Assuming that ESE!Sirius does not exist, though maybe ESS...EverSoStupid does, they were left with a choice. Accept DD or pick a friend, who would immediately have a big target on their back. They, as per canon, chose to go with their friends. Perhaps little Peter had a hand in that. A few casual cracks, some 'but, don't you trust us, James?', other more subtle commentary...why did they suspect Lupin? Was someone just under the radar always making comments about being glad Remus wasn't like all those other werewolves, to fall for LV's tricks like that? The final question, though, IS how Sirius knew to check up on the Potters. What sent him post-haste to Godric's Hollow. However, as per canon, he got there too late. Hagrid was already there with Harry, and James and Lily were dead. It makes an odd amount of sense for Sirius to know where the Potters were, because Peter could have told him and he'd not have been able to pass on the info since he wasn't the SK. But, how did DD & Hagrid know? Did the Potter's deaths break the Fidelis Charm? If so, how did that affect anyone who knew the Potters? The Other Cheryl [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Mon Nov 29 21:05:16 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 21:05:16 -0000 Subject: Trusting characters Re: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs In-Reply-To: <147.39f2268e.2edce6ef@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118823 The Other Cheryl: > Assuming that ESE!Sirius does not exist, though maybe > ESS...EverSoStupid does.... > The final question, though, IS how Sirius knew to check up > on the Potters. What sent him post-haste to Godric's Hollow. > However, as per canon, he got there too late. Hagrid was already > there with Harry, and James and Lily were dead. It makes an odd > amount of sense for Sirius to know where the Potters were, because > Peter could have told him and he'd not have been able to pass on > the info since he wasn't the SK. But, how did DD & Hagrid know? Did > the Potter's deaths break the Fidelis Charm? If so, how did that > affect anyone who knew the Potters? SSSusan: I wonder if your first [amusing :-)] statement 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. Siriusly Snapey Susan From ikhendley at yahoo.com Mon Nov 29 20:56:31 2004 From: ikhendley at yahoo.com (ikhendley) Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 20:56:31 -0000 Subject: Does Viktor Krum become an important character? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118824 I was looking through the polls and glanced into the one that asks which minor character will play an important part in future developments. I was a little surprised that Viktor Krum did not appear in the list. There are reasons he could become more important. First, he is much taken with Hermione, who is a major character and has lots of insider knowledge about what has happened and what is happening both at Hogwarts and in the Order. His affection could even propel forward a showdown of sorts with Ron, since Ron also is attracted to Hermione and hasn't yet learned how to express it. We don't learn if Hermione accepted his offer of a summer visit between Gof and OotP, but the possibility is not ruled out. She may keep it quiet just to stop Ron from teasing her. Second, in OotP Hermione was in contact with him through long letters. Ron even gets upset at her for writing to "Vicky". Third, in GoF he expressed some distain for Karkaroff, who is a known ex-DE. This could create a connection in other parts of the world for HRH. Krum is out of school and fully trained (in the DA?) and told Hermione that he thinks highly of Harry. We don't know anything about his family, but they could be as influential in their area as the Malfoys are in theirs. Fourth, his Quidditch-playing ability is known throughout the WW and in some circles it provides him with some credentials. He is not on the scene in OotP, but he is in contact. Therefore, I think a case could be made that he could play a more major role in the future. India From mgrantwich at yahoo.com Mon Nov 29 21:22:24 2004 From: mgrantwich at yahoo.com (Magda Grantwich) Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 13:22:24 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Trusting characters Re: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041129212224.84086.qmail@web53103.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 118825 > SSSusan: > Why not go to DD first? Why not wait around at Peter's a couple of > hours longer? Because it's *war* and so much is at stake! > > Sirius *is* a rash, impulsive kind of guy. In his shoes, I can't > imagine why one would NOT rush off to the site where the most > potential damage could have occurred, to ascertain whether James, > Lily & Harry are still safe. IF they are safe, then start worrying > about what's held Peter up, perhaps contact DD. IF something's > gone > wrong, maybe Sirius hopes he can get to GH in time to help fight > off > Voldy -- or to tell James & Lily to get out or be on the lookout -- > or even to help them if they're hurt but not dead. Any number of > possibilities comes to mind. Rushing off to DD *first* would only > delay in a situation where every second could be vitally important > [as we now know it was]. Dumbledore was the head of the Order that Sirius that Sirius belonged to. It's normal procedure for a subordinate to check in with his commander before he undertakes an important initiative that will have an effect on the Order as a whole. That is not unnecessary delay - that is sound military tactics. What possible good could Sirius do fighting off Voldemort in some kind of spur-of-the-moment duel? Was he going to expelliarmus Voldy's wand while James pantsed him in front of any DE's who happened to be around? Granted, that apparently worked once but it's dangerous to rely on old tactics. Magda __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - You care about security. So do we. http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From irishwynch at aol.com Mon Nov 29 18:49:18 2004 From: irishwynch at aol.com (irishwynch at aol.com) Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 13:49:18 EST Subject: Foreshadowing? Message-ID: <42.5d60926c.2edcc92e@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 118826 Kelly wrote: > My guess is that the foreshadowings could be when > Sirius tells Harry > that those we love never really leave us I haven't seen the PoA movie since it first was released, but there were two things that stood out in my mind when we first heard JKR's mentioning of foreshawdowing. First was how much Hermione took over parts that Ron did in the book. The best example is at the Shrieking Shack, Hermione is the one that threatens Sirius instead of Ron. Ron's character just seemed less important in many parts of the movie. Then the scene when the three of them think Buckbeak has just been beheaded, the way Hermione turns to Ron for comfort and Harry embraces them both. That scene made me think of the responsibility Harry feels towards protecting his friends. Did anyone else notice those things? Marla From Vivamus at TaprootTech.com Mon Nov 29 21:32:58 2004 From: Vivamus at TaprootTech.com (Vivamus) Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 16:32:58 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Hermione's Time Turner In-Reply-To: <81.1bc6279e.2edbeb72@aol.com> Message-ID: <200411291633634.SM01064@devbox> No: HPFGUIDX 118827 -----Original Message----- From: martyb1130 at aol.com [mailto:martyb1130 at aol.com] Sent: Sunday, November 28, 2004 10:03 PM To: hpforgrownups at yahoogroups.com Subject: [HPforGrownups] Hermione's Time Turner Hello, is anybody else interested in what else this time turner in PoA can reveal or help? Why didn't Prof. McGonagall use this when she found out that the Potters were murdered? How much of the past does this time turner go in? It is very curious that it comes up in book 3 when it could be so useful. Brodeur Vivamus: I'm very interested in it. The events of PoA seem to indicate a static history view of time travel (as opposed to a multi-threaded universe view,) but I don't think we have seen that confirmed for certain. That would imply that only events which are uncertain can be changed. McG, therefore, could not possibly have gone back to affect the past once it was known the Potters were dead. The only reason Harry and Hermione could go back and do what they did was that they had already done it. (I know, that is a paradox, but remember Harry and Hermione both actually saw or interacted with their future selves in their *first* foray through the loop.) I find it an interestingly deterministic approach, given JKR's emphasis on free will, and I'm fascinated to see what she will do with it. I'm inclined to think that choices can only affect the future in the Potterverse, but H/H certainly made many significant choices while they were looped. OTOH, if choices can be made in the past, what about choices made differently on the loopback from the first time? If it can't result in multithreaded universe(s), there must be a deterministic lock of some kind that prevents things being anything other than what they are. The simplest explanation would be that of the foreknowledge interpretation of predestination: one is predestined from the beginning to go where one's free will and free choices will ultimately take one, because there is foreknowledge of one's choices. So, one is destined from the beginning of time to end up where one actually chooses to be at the last moment, and all of one's existence is truly aimed at whichever destination one ultimately chooses (I'm trying to avoid theological hot-buttons here, so please excuse if this is somewhat vague.) In time travel terms, the loopback would contain free choices that *do* affect the first travel through the loop, but as one goes through the first loop, one is predestined BY ONE'S OWN FUTURE CHOICE to have already looped back and affected the current situation. Therefore, you have complete freedom of will, but the time-looped universe is already shaped according to the future exercise of your will. It makes a nice, neat package of it. The one thing it seems to overlook is when you directly interact with your future self, but JKR talked about that as well, when Hermione warned that "lots" of wizards have killed their past OR future selves. I'm not sure how you could kill your past self in a loopback without either disappearing forever once you did so -- in which case, what killed you? -- or create a divergent reality (and we are back to the multi-threaded universe, which I think PoA just doesn't allow.) It still has some paradox to it, but it is better than any other explanation I can think up. Dumbledore guessed that there was more than one Harry and Hermione running around, and he knew that Buckbeak had escaped. He was also smart enough to give them *just* enough information necessary to get the job done, and *nothing* more to influence them. 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.* One thing I'm wondering is whether there is such a thing as time peeking; i.e., seeing a short-term future far enough in advance as to be useful. Given all we've seen about Divination, it seems unlikely. Prophecy seems to be out of the control of the seer, so that it wouldn't suit their purposes. But what if they learned how to send a message back in time a short ways? Just far enough to know, before the match, the outcome. What if they figured out how to do this, and part of the magic had to do with an "anchor", kind of like a portkey, that must be charmed at the near end of the loop? They could have charmed the anchor and had all the other parts ready to complete it as soon as the match was over. They must have done it by some other means than themselves, though, or they would also have known that Bagman would stiff them. No, wait, he DID pay them, but it was in wizard gold, so they didn't know until later. Anyway, I suspect that time travel is too messy a plot device to use very much, but I'd be willing to bet it will show up again, in a minor way, at least. Vivamus, whose cat Snickersqueak is truly timeless From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com Mon Nov 29 21:34:11 2004 From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (arrowsmithbt) Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 21:34:11 -0000 Subject: Knowing it was Snape (was: What has Snape seen) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118828 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "cubfanbudwoman" wrote: > > 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! Cor! More possible agreement! Could be twice in one day! Now then SSS, take a deep breath - close your eyes - and repeat after me: "It wasn't the child that was Snape; it was the adult. And his wife was Florence. And the boy on the bucking broomstick wasn't Snape, it was James. Snape had hexed him." Very good. Have a LOLLIPOP. Er, no. On second thoughts take an AGGIE, they're low in fantasy. Kneasy From drednort at alphalink.com.au Mon Nov 29 21:39:53 2004 From: drednort at alphalink.com.au (Shaun Hately) Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2004 08:39:53 +1100 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Hogwarts letters Re: Choosing sides In-Reply-To: References: <41AB3D5A.18638.15D6BC4@localhost> Message-ID: <41AC31D9.24276.1CEE051@localhost> No: HPFGUIDX 118830 On 29 Nov 2004 at 19:43, delwynmarch wrote: > > > Shaun wrote : > " It's not the same situation as having magical ability in the HP > universe, but a lot of these kids are not formally identified until > quite late in their childhoods - age 8 or older is not uncommon, some > not until their early teens. But many, many of them prior to formal > identification display tendencies that are 'different' or 'concerning' > to parents. And I can certainly see a possibility that happens with > muggle parents of wizarding kids in the HP universe." > > Del replies : > I don't think it is similar. > > First, a highly gifted kid is highly gifted 24/7. A magical kid oozes > magic only once in a while, usually when stressed. Well, no, I'd rather disagree with that. I would say that both are 'gifted' or 'magical' 24/7. Some gifted children display their gifts extremely openly, however, many do not, and indeed quite often their gifts only apparent 'once in a while' (this is one reason why that are often not formally identified until they are older). But just because it isn't obvious, and isn't being shown, doesn't mean it's not there, and it's not still a constant part of their life. I don't think you can make that assumption for magical children either. Rarity of expression does not mean it's not always present. > Second, a highly gifted kid can't stop being highly gifted, and live > as a non-gifted kid. A magical kid could learn to master his magic and > live as a Muggle, as far as we know. I don't remember that we are ever > told in the books that magical kids who don't receive a magical > education suffer severe emotional problems. I could be wrong though. We are not told *anything* about magical kids who don't receive a magical education as far as I can recall. And I think it'd be rather dangerous to assume that such a child can 'master their magic' and live as a Muggle. Especially as if they don't go to Hogwarts, it's unlikely they will ever have much idea of what is going on. And while I agree that highly gifted kids can't stop being highly gifted, a great many are expected to do so, and live as 'non- gifted' - sometimes that is something that is done to them explicitly, more often it's something they wind up doing by default, because they are not offered any help. Many are quite successful at doing it - relatively few are happy about it. You often can suppress your gifts, whatever they are, to lead a more 'normal' life. But it's very rarely a good idea in any field of human endeavour - most people who do it do wind up unhappy, or they find some other outlet (hobbies etc) where they can express their gifts. I see very little reason to think magical talent is psychologically different from other forms - and I also think it'd be one of the hardest areas to find a special outlet for it. Yours Without Wax, Dreadnought Shaun Hately | www.alphalink.com.au/~drednort/thelab.html (ISTJ) | drednort at alphalink.com.au | ICQ: 6898200 "You know the very powerful and the very stupid have one thing in common. They don't alter their views to fit the facts. They alter the facts to fit the views. Which can be uncomfortable if you happen to be one of the facts that need altering." The Doctor - Doctor Who: The Face of Evil Where am I: Frankston, Victoria, Australia From bboyminn at yahoo.com Mon Nov 29 21:44:37 2004 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 21:44:37 -0000 Subject: Another Flint? (Was: When?) In-Reply-To: <20041128213923.55931.qmail@web53106.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118831 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Juli wrote: > ...edited... > > 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. > > Juli bboyminn: 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. Steve/bboyminn (was bboy_MN) From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Mon Nov 29 22:01:06 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 22:01:06 -0000 Subject: Hogwarts letters Re: Choosing sides In-Reply-To: <41AC31D9.24276.1CEE051@localhost> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118832 Shaun wrote : " We are not told *anything* about magical kids who don't receive a magical education as far as I can recall. And I think it'd be rather dangerous to assume that such a child can 'master their magic' and live as a Muggle. Especially as if they don't go to Hogwarts, it's unlikely they will ever have much idea of what is going on." Del replies : It doesn't have to be a choice between going to Hogwarts to learn to use magic, and not knowing what's going on. There could be a middle-ground where magical kids are told what they are and what they can do about it if they don't want to go to Hogwarts. A bit like a gifted child can be told that he is gifted and what it means, and how he can deal with it even if he doesn't want to develop or use his gift. Shaun wrote : "You often can suppress your gifts, whatever they are, to lead a more 'normal' life. But it's very rarely a good idea in any field of human endeavour - most people who do it do wind up unhappy, or they find some other outlet (hobbies etc) where they can express their gifts. I see very little reason to think magical talent is psychologically different from other forms - and I also think it'd be one of the hardest areas to find a special outlet for it." Del replies : Sure. But take Harry for example : he's always known there was something a bit different about him, but he never seemed bothered by it. Granted, he had more pressing things on his mind (the Dursleys), but still we aren't told that he ever felt bad about the strange things that happened around him or to him. He felt bad when he was punished for doing them even though he didn't do them consciously, but that's about it. In fact, when he is told that he is a wizard, he doesn't believe it at first. He sure doesn't go "Oh ! So *that's* it !". It doesn't seem to me like he would have been miserable living as a Muggle, had he had better parents than the Dursleys, and especially after being explained that he is magical and this is why some strange things happen sometimes. I really don't see that the Muggleborns *need* to develop their magic in order to be happy. Del From drednort at alphalink.com.au Mon Nov 29 22:23:41 2004 From: drednort at alphalink.com.au (Shaun Hately) Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2004 09:23:41 +1100 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Hogwarts letters Re: Choosing sides In-Reply-To: References: <41AC31D9.24276.1CEE051@localhost> Message-ID: <41AC3C1D.31626.1F6FB90@localhost> No: HPFGUIDX 118833 On 29 Nov 2004 at 22:01, delwynmarch wrote: > Del replies : > It doesn't have to be a choice between going to Hogwarts to learn to > use magic, and not knowing what's going on. There could be a > middle-ground where magical kids are told what they are and what they > can do about it if they don't want to go to Hogwarts. A bit like a > gifted child can be told that he is gifted and what it means, and how > he can deal with it even if he doesn't want to develop or use his gift. That might be a valid choice - it's very hard in my opinion to know if it is or not from what we see in the books. But given the things that happened to Harry before he went to Hogwarts, I'm inclined to doubt that that is a good choice. The 'wild displays' like hair growing uncontrollably, and winding up on the roof of a school, risk exposing the existence of magical powers. That endangers the wizarding world. It also potentially endangers the untrained wizard and those around them. I'm not sure that they can just tell the child what is happening and what they can do about it. It looks to me like they need training for safety reasons - and not just a little bit. Harry after two years of training has so little control he still blows up his aunt - under extreme provocation, I'll grant you, but that type of public display would have to be considered very risky. > Shaun wrote : > "You often can suppress your gifts, whatever they are, to lead a more > 'normal' life. But it's very rarely a good idea in any field of human > endeavour - most people who do it do wind up unhappy, or they find > some other outlet (hobbies etc) where they can express their gifts. I > see very little reason to think magical talent is psychologically > different from other forms - and I also think it'd be one of the > hardest areas to find a special outlet for it." > > Del replies : > Sure. > But take Harry for example : he's always known there was something a > bit different about him, but he never seemed bothered by it. Granted, > he had more pressing things on his mind (the Dursleys), but still we > aren't told that he ever felt bad about the strange things that > happened around him or to him. He felt bad when he was punished for > doing them even though he didn't do them consciously, but that's about > it. In fact, when he is told that he is a wizard, he doesn't believe > it at first. He sure doesn't go "Oh ! So *that's* it !". Which, by the way, is also true of a huge number of gifted kids. They often know they are different. And often it doesn't bother them until they reach around age 10-12. And often they initially don't believe when they are told either. > It doesn't seem to me like he would have been miserable living as a > Muggle, had he had better parents than the Dursleys, and especially > after being explained that he is magical and this is why some strange > things happen sometimes. Well, it does to me. Maybe if he had had a loving environment and *never* found out about being a wizard, he might not have been miserable. But if you knew that you had this potential, and that you could have developed it, and that you didn't... I can see that causing all sorts of problems in later life. > I really don't see that the Muggleborns *need* to develop their magic > in order to be happy. It's not so much a matter, I suppose of needing to develop talents to make you happy... it's more a matter of knowing that you didn't miss the chance, that leaves people content. 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 susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Mon Nov 29 22:44:17 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 22:44:17 -0000 Subject: Trusting characters Re: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs In-Reply-To: <20041129212224.84086.qmail@web53103.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118834 SSSusan: > > Why not go to DD first? Why not wait around at Peter's a couple > > of hours longer? Because it's *war* and so much is at stake! > > > > Sirius *is* a rash, impulsive kind of guy. In his shoes, I > > can't imagine why one would NOT rush off to the site where the > > most potential damage could have occurred, to ascertain whether > > James, Lily & Harry are still safe. IF they are safe, then > > start worrying about what's held Peter up, perhaps contact DD. > > IF something's gone wrong, maybe Sirius hopes he can get to GH > > in time to help fight off Voldy -- or to tell James & Lily to > > get out or be on the lookout -- or even to help them if they're > > hurt but not dead. Any number of possibilities comes to mind. > > Rushing off to DD *first* would only delay in a situation where > > every second could be vitally important [as we now know it was]. Magda: > Dumbedore was the head of the Order that Sirius that Sirius > belonged to. It's normal procedure for a subordinate to check in > with his commander before he undertakes an important initiative > that will have an effect on the Order as a whole. That is not > unnecessary delay - that is sound military tactics. > > What possible good could Sirius do fighting off Voldemort in some > kind of spur-of-the-moment duel? Was he going to expelliarmus > Voldy's wand while James pantsed him in front of any DE's who > happened to be around? Granted, that apparently worked once but > it's dangerous to rely on old tactics. SSSusan: 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. Siriusly Snapey Susan, not defending Sirius so much as offering up an explanation From manawydan at ntlworld.com Mon Nov 29 22:48:50 2004 From: manawydan at ntlworld.com (manawydan) Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 22:48:50 -0000 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Muggleborns choosing WW References: <1101083472.8698.52936.m1@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <008001c4d665$99b78a40$704b6d51@f3b7j4> No: HPFGUIDX 118835 A late response to these posts, I know: suddenly after much thought I knew how to respond. Sandy wrote: >Well, maybe I'm misunderstanding what you mean about "useless or alienating work." You snipped my example of the >apparently bored and unhappy receptionist at St. Mungos, who seems like she's just absolutely had enough of dealing with >people suffering from magical maladies. And I'd add the bored security guard who checks Harry's wand before the >hearing -- spending most of his day reading the paper. Neither of these people seem any more happy with their work than >your average WalMart clerk. I've got nothing against work, and think people are happiest when they have something >useful to do. Possibly not. But then that's not the angle from which I'm approaching the question. It's inevitable in any setup that there will be people who are happy or unhappy in their work. But what I was talking about was the work setup _itself_. What do I mean by that? Basically that the picture that I form of the WW economy has a lot more in common with the 18th than with the 20th/21st century: one where there's a lot of handicraft type work going on, where there's not a lot of the kind of mass production and mind control that came in with the industrial revolution, one in which there isn't the level of alienation which our world has in the workplace. >But I don't think JKR is trying >to show us that the WW world is a utopia where everyone has the absolutely perfect job for their talents and personality. >(You need look no farther than the faculty at Hogwarts, where a huge percentage -- including Snape, Trelawney, Binns >and Hagrid-as-teacher, as well as four out of five DADA teachers -- are really not suited for the job.) No, though returning to our earlier perspective of _their_ attitude to the job, we have Binns - so dedicated that not even death would keep him from his work, Trelawney - who goes totally to pieces at being sacked by Dolly Umbridge Hagrid - I can't remember the exact reference, but I seem to recall his being extremely proud at being given the CoMC job. Snape of course, being a Major Character, isn't so easy to categorise. Meanwhile, Ginger wrote: >It's not exactly stated, but QA seems to imply that broom making >started out as an individual job, but then moved to assembly style. >In the next paragraph, JKR says "A breakthrough occurred" when the >Ollerton brothers started the Cleansweep Broom Company, which >produced brooms "in numbers never seen before". This would seem to >indicate mass production. It could, but it's not the only model for production that the Ollertons could have used. Once again, I hark back to the 18th century. The typical method back then was called "putting-out", which meant that the manufacturer would give work to a number of small artisans, who would then do the work in their own homes, than bring it back to the manufacturer, who would pay them for it. I can more easily form a WW picture of a number of artisan broom makers from various parts of the country turning up at intervals for a new stock of materials than the kind of industrial revolution picture of a broomstick factory, surrounded by a dormitory of workers' tenements... But JKR alone knows all. Cheers FFred O Benryn wleth hyd Luch Reon Cymru yn unfryd gerhyd Wrion Gwret dy Cymry yghymeiri From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Mon Nov 29 23:00:35 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 23:00:35 -0000 Subject: Hogwarts letters Re: Choosing sides In-Reply-To: <41AC3C1D.31626.1F6FB90@localhost> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118836 Shaun wrote : "It's not so much a matter, I suppose of needing to develop talents to make you happy... it's more a matter of knowing that you didn't miss the chance, that leaves people content." Del replies : Yes, I understand. My main problem is that I don't see Muggleborn children as being magical over everything else. I see them as normal kids who have several talents, and magic happens to be one of them. But normal kids are rarely able to develop all their talents, they usually have to choose one or two and concentrate on those ones, at the detriment of the others. And by age 11, I would assume that many Muggleborns would already be well engaged in the process of developing other talents. So the idea that all of them are told that they are magical and that because of that they have to give up everything else and go to Hogwarts bothers me quite much. I cannot help but think that some of them must refuse to go, or that some parents must refuse to let them go. I would also expect some of those who do go to Hogwarts to be quite unhappy in the WW in general. It makes sense to me, emotionally and statistically. But maybe magic acts on its bearers, and takes precedence over everything else in their minds and hearts. I don't like that idea much better, but at least it would explain why we never hear of Muggleborns being unhappy to be magical and to have to leave the Muggle World. Del From sherriola at earthlink.net Mon Nov 29 23:04:59 2004 From: sherriola at earthlink.net (Sherry Gomes) Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 16:04:59 -0700 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Trusting characters Re: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <004a01c4d667$da296ce0$0400a8c0@pensive> No: HPFGUIDX 118837 Magda: > Dumbedore was the head of the Order that Sirius that Sirius > belonged to. It's normal procedure for a subordinate to check in > with his commander before he undertakes an important initiative > that will have an effect on the Order as a whole. That is not > unnecessary delay - that is sound military tactics. > > What possible good could Sirius do fighting off Voldemort in some > kind of spur-of-the-moment duel? Was he going to expelliarmus > Voldy's wand while James pantsed him in front of any DE's who > happened to be around? Granted, that apparently worked once but > it's dangerous to rely on old tactics. SSSusan: 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. Sherry now: Going on what we've seen of the character of Sirius, it would have been completely like him to rush off to try to help James. After all, this isn't a trained army. It's a bunch of volunteers who hate the evil and are trying to fight it. Dumbledore is the commander, of course, but he hasn't engrained sound military tactics into his followers or order members, that we know of. In fact, it isn't even that kind of war, two armies facing each other across a battle field. There's no way that Sirius would have calmly waited to get orders from Dumbledore, if he thought his best friend and surrogate brother was in danger. He'd try to help, even if he hadn't thought it through yet. And how many of we real world folk would do any less to help our friends? I'd probably call the police and rush to my friend in similar circumstances. However the order members communicated, we don't know if Sirius tried to contact Dumbledore or not as he raced to help James. Sherry G (who will never be convinced of ESE Sirius either) From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Mon Nov 29 23:10:49 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 23:10:49 -0000 Subject: Trusting characters Re: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118838 SSSusan 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. Siriusly Snapey Susan, not defending Sirius so much as offering up an explanation" Del comments : There's one major point that we mustn't forget when we discuss Sirius's actions, especially where DD is concerned : concerning the SK plan, James and Sirius had acted *on their own*, without telling DD what they were doing. They hadn't acted as soldiers respectful of authority and part of a global plan, but as free electrons. So why would Sirius revert to being a respectful soldier when he found out that Peter was missing ? 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 ? Del From nadinesaintamour at hotmail.com Mon Nov 29 23:17:04 2004 From: nadinesaintamour at hotmail.com (catimini15) Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 23:17:04 -0000 Subject: Knowing it was Snape (was: What has Snape seen) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118839 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "cubfanbudwoman" wrote: Snip) > 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! Nadine : I haven't studied in litterature either and English is not even my mother tongue as I said repeatedly on this list but I believe that the two excerpts have been written in the same fashion : the narrator describes Harry's perceptions. In the GoF example, Harry does not recognise Hermione. She is dressed differently (like everyone else that night - which is enough for Harry's head to spin), she has a different hairdoo and it is so unlikely a situation for her to be Krum's partner, that Harry recognises her only the second time he looks at her. And his jaw drops. Fine. In the OotP scene, Harry is practising Occlumency with his second to last favorite teacher (another situation to make his head spin). In this passage, what strikes me as important is the fact that Harry - right away - was ?SURE he had just broken into Snape's memories? and that it ?was UNNERVING to think that the little boy who had been crying as he watched his parents - not two unidentify adults, not two teachers, not his aunt and uncle, no ! his PARENTS ! - shouting was actually standing in front of him with such loathing in his eyes?. Snape has loathing in his eyes because he knows that Harry has just seen a painful (my interpretation) memory of Snape from his childood. Despite what Kneasy thinks, I believe that Snape is the crying child, not the shouting adult. If Harry had seen the memory of an adult Snape bullying a woman in front of a crying child, Snape wouldn't care less. This memory would be in sync with the present day Snape (whether it is his real character or just one big great act, I leave it for you to choose). What I mean is that he wouldn't loath Harry for having seen him bullying this unidentified wowan. I am not sure I am making sense... Oh well... Cheers, Nadine From jlnbtr at yahoo.com Mon Nov 29 22:26:14 2004 From: jlnbtr at yahoo.com (Juli) Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 14:26:14 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Does Viktor Krum become an important character? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041129222614.50743.qmail@web53106.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 118840 India: > We don't learn if Hermione accepted his offer of a summer visit between Gof and OotP, but the possibility is not ruled out. She may keep it quiet just to stop Ron from teasing her. Juli: But Hermione was at 12 GP between GoF and OoP, she was there with Ron and the rest of the Order, we don't know since when but it seems to me that it probably was for almost the entire summer. > Second, in OotP Hermione was in contact with him through long letters. Ron even gets upset at her for writing to "Vicky". JKR does say in her website that we will see even more of Viktor, my bet is that he'll join the Order, he certainly knows how to defend himself against Dark Magic, Karkaroff taught Dark Magic at Durmstrang which I bet also inluded some DADA, and he was a Triwizard champion. > Third, in GoF he expressed some distain for > Karkaroff, who is a known > ex-DE. This could create a connection in other parts > of the world for > HRH. I think Viktor is anti-Dark arts, just by the way he acted during the Triwizard tournament and his behavior, besides Hermione is usually a very good judge of character and she would never befriend a dark art lover. Juli- Imagining the look on Rons face when he finds out that Viktor is the newest Order Member and LOL __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Take Yahoo! Mail with you! Get it on your mobile phone. http://mobile.yahoo.com/maildemo From nadinesaintamour at hotmail.com Mon Nov 29 23:45:56 2004 From: nadinesaintamour at hotmail.com (catimini15) Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 23:45:56 -0000 Subject: Knowing it was Snape (was: What has Snape seen) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118841 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "arrowsmithbt" wrote: (snip) > Now then SSS(usan), take a deep breath - close your eyes - and repeat after > me: > "It wasn't the child that was Snape; it was the adult. And his wife was > Florence. And the boy on the bucking broomstick wasn't Snape, it was > James. Snape had hexed him." > > Very good. Have a LOLLIPOP. Er, no. On second thoughts take an AGGIE, > they're low in fantasy. The more I think about Florence, the more I believe she is a red herring. It was important, for JKR, to write the pensieve scene in which Dumbledore summons Bertha's smoky memory for the reason that Harry could recognize Bertha in the Priori Incantatem Chapter. The fact that she is telling the Headmaster that she has seen someone kissing Florence behind the greenhouses and was hexed for it by ?he? is just a funny little passage in which JKR confirms that, according to Sirius, Bertha Jorkins was, indeed, ?a bit dim but (...) had an excellent memory for gossip? (GoF - Chapter Padfoot Returns). Nadine From jlnbtr at yahoo.com Mon Nov 29 22:10:53 2004 From: jlnbtr at yahoo.com (Juli) Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 14:10:53 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Another Flint? (Was: When?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041129221054.46021.qmail@web53106.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 118842 > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Juli > wrote: > > > > ...edited... > > > > 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: > > 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. > I like your idea Steve, it would be extremely funny to see Dennis levitating over the fence or wall, but... it's just too easy, maybe he took one of the tunnels, just like Harry did in PoA, Fred and George could have told them how to open it, but I doubt they are willing to share their secret with anyone considering they didn't even tell Ron about it. Or since it's JKR's world she just changed the rules, allowing Dennis and other 2nd year students to visit Hogsmeade. Juli __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - You care about security. So do we. http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From mommystery at hotmail.com Tue Nov 30 00:06:31 2004 From: mommystery at hotmail.com (mommystery2003) Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2004 00:06:31 -0000 Subject: Does Viktor Krum become an important character? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118843 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "ikhendley" wrote: > He is not on the scene in OotP, but he is in contact. Therefore, I > think a case could be made that he could play a more major role in > the future. I hope not. I do not like Krum at all, nor do I trust him. He is one character I wouldn't cry any tears over if JKR killed him off. I think he's a nasty piece of work. I know he expresses admiration for Harry, but that could just be a cover-up. While I don't think he particularly liked Karakoff, I can see him as a junior DE, just like Malfoy. He could be using Hermione to get as much information on Harry as possible. I also had problems with Hermione playing a part for him in GoF. Why pick a student from Hogwarts to help a student from Durmstrang? That doesn't seem quite like fair play in my book. I'm sure there was someone that Krum had known much longer and cared for than Hermione. My other pet peeve about Krum is the way he pronounces Hermione's name. For crying out loud, the guy is supposed to be an adult and can't pronounce her name after months? Having a hard name to pronounce myself, I know most people take time to learn the correct pronounciation after only a few tries. Krum doesn't seem to make an effort. Ces - who really can't stand Viktor Krum and hopes to see a lot less of him in the future. From ginnysthe1 at yahoo.com Tue Nov 30 00:25:31 2004 From: ginnysthe1 at yahoo.com (ginnysthe1) Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2004 00:25:31 -0000 Subject: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118844 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" wrote: > > Carol earlier (quoted by Kim) > > "...all speculating at this point. I think that Sirius, for example, > > associated Severus with what he hated about his own home and family, > > which (for me) explains his vindictiveness. He may even have > [rejected*] that hatred of the Dark Arts onto James as an explanation > of why he disliked Severus. But James seems to be entertaining himself > (and Sirius) by bullying Severus in the Pensieve scene. He dislikes > him, certainly, but he doesn't seem to share Sirius's virulent hatred."> > > Carol again: > *Actually I said "projected," not "rejected." I went up thread to > check. Don't know how the quote could have been altered if it was > copied and pasted, or left in the original snipped message, but it > definitely has been altered. > > Carol, who was going to correct herself but discovered that the error > wasn't her own --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" wrote: > > Carol earlier (quoted by Kim) > > "...all speculating at this point. I think that Sirius, for example, > > associated Severus with what he hated about his own home and family, > > which (for me) explains his vindictiveness. He may even have > [rejected*] that hatred of the Dark Arts onto James as an explanation > of why he disliked Severus. But James seems to be entertaining himself > (and Sirius) by bullying Severus in the Pensieve scene. He dislikes > him, certainly, but he doesn't seem to share Sirius's virulent hatred."> > > Carol again: > *Actually I said "projected," not "rejected." I went up thread to > check. Don't know how the quote could have been altered if it was > copied and pasted, or left in the original snipped message, but it > definitely has been altered. > > Carol, who was going to correct herself but discovered that the error > wasn't her own Kim now, to Carol and other posters: I don't know how Carol's "projected" became "rejected" either. If it was an error of mine, I heartily apologize. I do not like the idea of anyone "rewording" my posts, so I wouldn't do it to anyone else on purpose. I do use copy and paste as we're supposed to, but one thing I also do is to neaten up (IMO) the formatting of the posts, and perhaps that's where the error got into the quote from Carol's post, though it's still hard for me to imagine myself changing "pro" to "re". Oh well, sorry!! In any case, if it helps, in the first post where I quoted that same passage (see no. 118500), I had it as "projected." Kim (hoping the List Elves don't find this post off-topic since I think it was necessary to set the record straight to all) From jlnbtr at yahoo.com Mon Nov 29 22:32:13 2004 From: jlnbtr at yahoo.com (Juli) Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 14:32:13 -0800 (PST) Subject: DD and Snape In-Reply-To: <20041129212915.93617.qmail@web53104.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041129223213.53948.qmail@web53109.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 118845 Kneasy: > I've banged on about this before, but as you're > fairly new to the site you haven't yet had a > chance to get bored with Kneasy's vapourings. > Still, we can soon put that right. Kneasy, I didn't get bored to even a little while reading you post, we seem to think alike regarding Snape-DD > (Interesting speculation here: suppose DD cops it > in the neck. What would happen to the relationship > between Snape and the Order? Would he be willing > to take instructions from anyone else? Would anyone > else trust him?) I think Snape feels he's an important Order Member, just like Moody, Remus or whoever, and the rest of the Order seem to accept him as such, there may be some feelings from way back, but almost everyone seems over them, except Sirius of course, but since he's death it won't matter a lot anymore. If DD was to die, who would direct the Order? What would happen with his task as the SK? Will 12 GP be at everyone's reach, or will nobody new will be able to get there? I hope we never get to see that, I wouldn't like LV to drop dead. > He seems to make no apologies for the Slytherin > mind-set or any antisocial attitudes they may > espouse. His animus appears to be focussed on > Voldy only. Maybe this is all part of his undercover work, if all of a sudden he began treating Draco or any other DE son, LV would find out probably and compromise his work, so he acts like a jerk towards everyone but Slytherins, but I think deep down he cares for all his students, he can't show it, but maybe after LV is vanquished for good he'll say "Good work, Longbottoms". > There will still be those who think Voldy had the > right idea, they'll just be keeping a low profile > until until yet another so-called 'Glorious Leader' > turns up to rally the believers. > Depressing thought. Few DEs that survive the war will be faced with a choice: to either resign to the Dark Side for good, or die (Is there a death penalty on the WW besides the Dementor's kiss?), but I can't see Lucius being on the good side, his core is evil and you can't change that. And there will always be another "Dark Lord" or whatever, just he won't be Voldemort, maybe in 50 years there will be another one, I don't think after LV is gone, there would be no more evil in the World, there has to be Evil in order for Good to exist, it's just a way to keep the universe in equilibrium and in balance, there has to be a Yang for the Ying to exist. Juli From mgrantwich at yahoo.com Tue Nov 30 01:00:10 2004 From: mgrantwich at yahoo.com (Magda Grantwich) Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 17:00:10 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Trusting characters Re: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041130010010.38361.qmail@web53101.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 118846 --- cubfanbudwoman wrote: > SSSusan: > 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. I don't think anyone really believes that he was evil or a double-crosser or a coward. And his case as presented does make sense and all of his actions are very much in character. At Hogwarts, Sirius and James were very used to being bright and at the top of their classes, they were used to going around authority if not ignoring it completely, they were reckless but rarely (if ever) suffered for it, and in general had good reason to believe that they could take care of themselves in any circumstances. They'd safely hung out with a werewolf for years, James and Lily had defied Voldemort three times, they had come up with magical devices to allow them to circumvent uncomfortable situations (ie, the mirrors) and were used to going their own way. So I find it quite easy to believe that Sirius would propose - and James would accept - the SK switching scheme (the SKSS for short). Personally I think the idea was bad from the start even if Peter hadn't been a traitor: it strikes me as a short-term plan that would have been unsustainable in the long run since the disappearance of Sirius and Peter from social circulation for more than a few weeks would inevitably attract comment and attention. Not to mention Voldemort's talents as a Legilimens (which Dumbledore would have known about through Snape if no other way) which would have got the truth out of either of them had Voldemort caught either Peter or Sirius. So Sirius didn't think through all the possible ramifications of his actions - just like he didn't think through all the ramifications of the Prank with all the bad things that would have happened to Remus, Dumbledore and Snape had James not intervened. Then we have Sirius getting worried and checking out Peter's hidey hole and then going off to GH and finding the wreckage. And then going after Peter single-handedly, even though he now knew that there was more to Peter than he'd at first assumed and that since Peter knew that he was supposed to meet him, there was every possibility of a trap. Ditto what I said above about Sirius not thinking through all the angles before acting. And add on a description of recklessness because he had no idea what he'd actually be facing when he caught up with Peter, as well as not taking the time to stop and inform his commanding officer what he was up to. Didn't they have owls in Godric's Hollow? These are not signs that Sirius was evil or a double-crosser. They are signs that the same traits that made him a fun friend and great guy to have along on an illicit adventure were the exact same traits that would take him straight into the jaws of a beautifully executed trap. I don't think we've really begun to plumb the depths of Peter's cunning as revealed in the 24 hours after Voldemort went to GH. Peter might have been an average student compared to his friends but he obviously has more than his share of cunning and he's very observant. He read Sirius like a book and knew exactly how he'd react to finding Peter missing and then finding the wreckage at GH. He knew all the buttons to press to send Sirius into an emotional state where he was incapable of rational thought. And it didn't occur to Sirius until he watched Peter disappear into a sewer and realized he'd been magnificently "pranked" by the loser of the group. No wonder the MoM thought he'd gone mad. Magda __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Meet the all-new My Yahoo! - Try it today! http://my.yahoo.com From mgrantwich at yahoo.com Tue Nov 30 01:10:15 2004 From: mgrantwich at yahoo.com (Magda Grantwich) Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 17:10:15 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Trusting characters Re: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs In-Reply-To: <004a01c4d667$da296ce0$0400a8c0@pensive> Message-ID: <20041130011015.6264.qmail@web53109.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 118847 --- Sherry Gomes wrote: >After all, this isn't a trained army. It's a bunch of volunteers >who hate the evil and are trying to fight it. Dumbledore is the >commander, of course, but he hasn't engrained sound military tactics >into his followers or order members, that we know of. In fact, it >isn't even that kind of war, two armies facing each >other across a battle field. There's no way that Sirius would have >calmly waited to get orders from Dumbledore, if he thought his best >friend and surrogate brother was in danger. He'd try to help, even >if he hadn't thought it through yet. Just because they're not wearing uniforms doesn't mean that the Order shouldn't have some level of military discipline to it. A bunch of sincere volunteers doing their own thing as long as its anti-Voldemort is not an effective force against evil, it's simply muddling along. If the Order has goals, it has plans and for those plans to work there has to be an agreement amongst the Order members to have discipline, obey the leadership when decisions are made, and keep the lines of communications open so that plans can be changed if necessary. Sirius going off on his own, however well-intentioned, sincere, even saintly if you like, was only setting himself up and wasn't doing anyone any good at all - certainly not James and Lily, certainly not Harry, and certainly not the rest of the Order. Being Sirius he reacted in a characteristic fashion and because of this Peter Pettigrew - his inferior in every respect - was able to manouevre him into a trap. Magda __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Take Yahoo! Mail with you! Get it on your mobile phone. http://mobile.yahoo.com/maildemo From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Tue Nov 30 01:13:06 2004 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (delwynmarch) Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2004 01:13:06 -0000 Subject: Does Viktor Krum become an important character? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118848 Ces wrote : " I do not like Krum at all, nor do I trust him. He is one character I wouldn't cry any tears over if JKR killed him off. I think he's a nasty piece of work." Del replies : Oh !? But... Why ??? I'm not criticising you or anything, I'm just very surprised. What makes you dislike Viktor so much ?? Ces wrote : "I know he expresses admiration for Harry, but that could just be a cover-up. While I don't think he particularly liked Karakoff, I can see him as a junior DE, just like Malfoy. He could be using Hermione to get as much information on Harry as possible." Del replies : Do you have any canon to back up your suspicions ? I personally think that for a Durmstrang and a world celebrity, Viktor acted very decently in GoF. We've seen Draco do lots of nasty stuff, but I can't remember seeing Viktor do anything even remotely bad. Ces wrote : "I also had problems with Hermione playing a part for him in GoF. Why pick a student from Hogwarts to help a student from Durmstrang? That doesn't seem quite like fair play in my book. I'm sure there was someone that Krum had known much longer and cared for than Hermione." Del replies : But Hermione didn't *help* Viktor ! Quite the opposite in fact, since she was tied up and away during the whole Second Task. And she didn't *volunteer* for that part either. As for there being someone that Viktor cared more about : well, yes, maybe there would be someone in Bulgaria (I doubt he had any close friends among the Durmstrang students, since he fairly often hanged out on his own in the library). But bringing in Gabrielle from France (if she was indeed in France at the time) was already quite a stretch. Bringing in someone from Bulgaria would have been downright ridiculous. Especially since it was *very* obvious that Viktor was indeed quite taken with Hermione. Ces wrote : " My other pet peeve about Krum is the way he pronounces Hermione's name. For crying out loud, the guy is supposed to be an adult and can't pronounce her name after months? Having a hard name to pronounce myself, I know most people take time to learn the correct pronounciation after only a few tries. Krum doesn't seem to make an effort." Del replies : Don't be so hard on him. He's a foreigner remember ? I happen to be a transplant myself : there are names in this country I have a very hard time pronouncing, and many people have a hard time pronouncing my name. My in-laws even had to invent a more local-sounding variation of my name, because they just couldn't get it ! There are different sounds, different spellings, and so on, and all of those can really create barriers. Viktor strikes me as not being particularly gifted on a linguistic level (well, pretty much all foreigners seem to share in that weakness in the Potterverse - I mean, Fleur didn't even figure out the use of the letter H in English after spending several months at Hogwarts !), so I would think we could cut him some slack. Del, who likes Viktor Krum and hopes to see a bit more of him in the future From dontask2much at yahoo.com Tue Nov 30 01:30:15 2004 From: dontask2much at yahoo.com (charme) Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 20:30:15 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Another Flint? (Was: When?) References: <20041129221054.46021.qmail@web53106.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <00f701c4d67c$2540a9a0$6701a8c0@MITRE.ORG> No: HPFGUIDX 118849 >> --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Juli >> wrote: >> > >> > And talking about flints, has anyone come to an >> answer >> > of why was the young Creevey brother at the Hog's >> Head >> > meeting when Hermione told anyone who wanted to >> form a >> > DADA club to go? The kid was only in his 2nd year. >> >> bboyminn: >> >> It's easy, Dennis waited in the courtyard, while >> Fred and George >> exited the building heading for the main gate. >> However, unseen by >> Filch, they sneeked around the side of the castle >> and levitated Dennis >> over the courtyard wall. charme: Let's see how many ways the youngest Creevy could have "snuck" out to Hogsmeade if in fact only 3rd year students and above are allowed to go: 1) Young Master Creevy could be a natural animagus or metamorphagus 2) Dennis and his brother have developed some advanced magic like apparation on their own and are poised to be the next "Weasley" twins for that generation 3) The Creevy brothers could already have found their own ways out of Hogwarts (Dennis is TINY - no telling what he could fit through) 4) Could be the Fred & George scenario above, too :) I'm sure there are more...the Creevy brothers interest me a great deal WRT their contributions in the next 2 books. charme From dontask2much at yahoo.com Tue Nov 30 02:09:53 2004 From: dontask2much at yahoo.com (charme) Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 21:09:53 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Trusting characters Re: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs References: <20041130010010.38361.qmail@web53101.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <011801c4d681$aedf1fc0$6701a8c0@MITRE.ORG> No: HPFGUIDX 118850 From: "Magda Grantwich" > > So I find it quite easy to believe that Sirius would propose - and > James would accept - the SK switching scheme (the SKSS for short). > Personally I think the idea was bad from the start even if Peter > hadn't been a traitor: it strikes me as a short-term plan that would > have been unsustainable in the long run since the disappearance of > Sirius and Peter from social circulation for more than a few weeks > would inevitably attract comment and attention. Not to mention > Voldemort's talents as a Legilimens (which Dumbledore would have > known about through Snape if no other way) which would have got the > truth out of either of them had Voldemort caught either Peter or > Sirius. > > So Sirius didn't think through all the possible ramifications of his > actions - just like he didn't think through all the ramifications of > the Prank with all the bad things that would have happened to Remus, > Dumbledore and Snape had James not intervened. > > Then we have Sirius getting worried and checking out Peter's hidey > hole and then going off to GH and finding the wreckage. And then > going after Peter single-handedly, even though he now knew that there > was more to Peter than he'd at first assumed and that since Peter > knew that he was supposed to meet him, there was every possibility of > a trap. Ditto what I said above about Sirius not thinking through > all the angles before acting. And add on a description of > recklessness because he had no idea what he'd actually be facing when > he caught up with Peter, as well as not taking the time to stop and > inform his commanding officer what he was up to. Didn't they have > owls in Godric's Hollow? > > These are not signs that Sirius was evil or a double-crosser. They > are signs that the same traits that made him a fun friend and great > guy to have along on an illicit adventure were the exact same traits > that would take him straight into the jaws of a beautifully executed > trap. > > I don't think we've really begun to plumb the depths of Peter's > cunning as revealed in the 24 hours after Voldemort went to GH. > Peter might have been an average student compared to his friends but > he obviously has more than his share of cunning and he's very > observant. He read Sirius like a book and knew exactly how he'd > react to finding Peter missing and then finding the wreckage at GH. > He knew all the buttons to press to send Sirius into an emotional > state where he was incapable of rational thought. And it didn't > occur to Sirius until he watched Peter disappear into a sewer and > realized he'd been magnificently "pranked" by the loser of the group. > > No wonder the MoM thought he'd gone mad. > > Magda > charme: As I read your post, I was struck by something in GoF and OoP which might apply to your thoughts. In GoF, Fake!Moody tells Harry he "helped" him through the Triwizard Tournament, he makes a statement that "decent people are so easy to manipulate." And in OoP, DD makes reference to how he himself fell into a trap he tried to avoid, and in DD words, the way LV "expected we fools who love to act." How interesting that your last paragraph (to me, at least) echos those sentiments. charme From mommystery at hotmail.com Tue Nov 30 02:17:18 2004 From: mommystery at hotmail.com (mommystery2003) Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2004 02:17:18 -0000 Subject: Does Viktor Krum become an important character? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118851 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "delwynmarch" wrote: > Del replies : > Oh !? But... Why ??? I'm not criticising you or anything, I'm just > very surprised. What makes you dislike Viktor so much ?? Del, 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 : > Do you have any canon to back up your suspicions ? > I personally think that for a Durmstrang and a world celebrity, Viktor > acted very decently in GoF. > We've seen Draco do lots of nasty stuff, but I can't remember seeing > Viktor do anything even remotely bad. No I have no canon for back up, like I said, it's just a gut feeling that he's not all good. He did act somewhat decently in GoF, but I still have a problem trusting him. I just feel he has some ulterior motives somewhere. > > Del replies : > But Hermione didn't *help* Viktor ! Quite the opposite in fact, since > she was tied up and away during the whole Second Task. And she didn't > *volunteer* for that part either. > As for there being someone that Viktor cared more about : well, yes, > maybe there would be someone in Bulgaria (I doubt he had any close > friends among the Durmstrang students, since he fairly often hanged > out on his own in the library). But bringing in Gabrielle from France > (if she was indeed in France at the time) was already quite a stretch. > Bringing in someone from Bulgaria would have been downright > ridiculous. Especially since it was *very* obvious that Viktor was > indeed quite taken with Hermione. 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. I don't think Fleur's sister was there the entire time, but who knows? > > Del replies : > Don't be so hard on him. He's a foreigner remember ? I happen to be a > transplant myself : there are names in this country I have a very hard > time pronouncing, and many people have a hard time pronouncing my > name. My in-laws even had to invent a more local-sounding variation of > my name, because they just couldn't get it ! There are different > sounds, different spellings, and so on, and all of those can really > create barriers. > Viktor strikes me as not being particularly gifted on a linguistic > level (well, pretty much all foreigners seem to share in that weakness > in the Potterverse - I mean, Fleur didn't even figure out the use of > the letter H in English after spending several months at Hogwarts !), > so I would think we could cut him some slack. 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 Ces - who thinks she and Del will just have to agree to disagree about Viktor Krum! From Aisbelmon at hotmail.com Tue Nov 30 02:17:16 2004 From: Aisbelmon at hotmail.com (M.Clifford) Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2004 02:17:16 -0000 Subject: Does Viktor Krum become an important character? In-Reply-To: <20041129222614.50743.qmail@web53106.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118852 > I think Viktor is anti-Dark arts, just by the way he > acted during the Triwizard tournament and his > behavior, besides Hermione is usually a very good > judge of character and she would never befriend a dark > art lover. > > Juli- Imagining the look on Ron's face when he finds > out that Viktor is the newest Order Member and LOL > > > > __________________________________ Valky: With the release of HBP becoming ever more imminent I am getting an itch to start punting my surebet predictions for it. This would have to be my first one. Vicky will appear before Chapter Three, and he will be on the side of good. OOtP was his final year at Durmstrang so he is free and of age to be whomever he pleases, and he wants to help Harry. I predict that by the end of Spinners end we will discover that Hermione has already convinced Vicky to approach DD with his offer to help the fight against LV; and that since we last saw him in GOF he has put extra work into learning to shake off the Imperius. From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Tue Nov 30 02:18:12 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2004 02:18:12 -0000 Subject: Trusting characters Re: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs In-Reply-To: <20041130010010.38361.qmail@web53101.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118853 SSSusan: > > 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. Magda: > I don't think anyone really believes that he was evil or a > double-crosser or a coward. And his case as presented does make > sense and all of his actions are very much in character. SSSusan: Oh, but some do believe this! Several posters have proposed ESE! Sirius and even just within the last couple of day's worth of posts folks have talked about what a coward he was--saying he *pretended* to be willing to die for his friends but actually setting Peter up to be killed while he [Sirius] could run & hide. In fact, it was this outlook which caused me to protest that there was another way to interpret what Sirius was doing on the night of GH. Magda: > So I find it quite easy to believe that Sirius would propose - and > James would accept - the SK switching scheme (the SKSS for short). > Personally I think the idea was bad from the start even if Peter > hadn't been a traitor: it strikes me as a short-term plan that > would have been unsustainable in the long run.... > Not to mention Voldemort's talents as a Legilimens (which > Dumbledore would have known about through Snape if no other way) > which would have got the truth out of either of them had Voldemort > caught either Peter or Sirius. > > So Sirius didn't think through all the possible ramifications of > his actions - just like he didn't think through all the > ramifications of the Prank with all the bad things that would have > happened to Remus, Dumbledore and Snape had James not intervened. SSSusan: Yup, we're together on this. I think not thinking through all possible ramifications of one's actions is a "talent" Sirius shared with Harry! And I think Sirius had a worse case of it that Harry does. Magda: > These are not signs that Sirius was evil or a double-crosser. They > are signs that the same traits that made him a fun friend and great > guy to have along on an illicit adventure were the exact same > traits that would take him straight into the jaws of a beautifully > executed trap. SSSusan: Yup, we agree again. This is precisely how I see Sirius. So my argument was less with you than with those who do see Sirius as cowardly or ESE! At worst I see him as The Other Cheryl presented him earlier: ESS!Sirius [EverSoStupid!Sirius]. :-) Siriusly Snapey Susan From Aisbelmon at hotmail.com Tue Nov 30 02:28:27 2004 From: Aisbelmon at hotmail.com (M.Clifford) Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2004 02:28:27 -0000 Subject: Trusting characters Re: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118854 > > The Other Cheryl: > > Assuming that ESE!Sirius does not exist, though maybe > > ESS...EverSoStupid does.... > > Valky: OSB (Oh-So-Brilliant!TOC) :D I would like to subscribe to the Sirius is the stupidest smart person in HP history newsletter, if you please. > > SSSusan: > 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. > Valky: Hi Susan, I think it gets broken, when the protected are killed. IIRC Sirius says he *saw* the dead bodies of his friends at GH in POA. Oh poor Sirius.. From ginnysthe1 at yahoo.com Tue Nov 30 02:49:16 2004 From: ginnysthe1 at yahoo.com (ginnysthe1) Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2004 02:49:16 -0000 Subject: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118855 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" wrote: > > > Kim now: > > I think what may be missing in our interpretations is that in this > > scene James sees Severus in the light of his and Severus's own > > personal history together, a history which we can't see from our > > reader's POV. As a possible history, I'll offer this: After they > > first met one another, it somehow became apparent to James that > > Severus was a pureblood snob. Severus may be a "shabby-genteel" > > pureblood snob (hence the dingy underpants?), but he's a snob > > nonetheless. And pure-blood James doesn't like snobs. Why this is > > so, I've no idea, but I think it is so. (Also, pureblood Sirius > > doesn't like snobs either, does he, hence part of the reason for his > > dislike of his own family?) > > Carol responds: > Actually, I don't think snobbery is quite the right word here, since > Sirius comes across as arrogant and haughty himself, much like his > cousin Bellatrix in the Pensieve scene. He wants his friend James, who > is arrogant in a different "admire me" sort of way to entertain him. > Sirius says that the Blacks in general behave like royalty, a point > that's confirmed by the "Nature's Nobility" book title. Sirius at > fifteen, despite his rejection of the Dark Arts, still considers > himself too good or too smart to study (see his rude remark to Remus > regarding the Transfiguration exam). > > I don't think the "arrogant little berks" are rejecting snobbishness > per se. They, too, seem to think they're better than everyone else. I > think whatever is between them and Severus is personal, possibly an > instinctive dislike of a skinny, greasy but talented boy on James's > part and a projection of his own hated Dark Wizard family onto Severus > by Sirius. Certainly Sirius's dislike of his own family plays a part > here, but IMO it's not the snobbery he's rejecting. He's a snob > himself, as indicated by his scornful disregard of the girls who think > he's handsome and his treatment of the other Marauders, even James. > > Carol, who really should stop replying to this thread! Kim now: But snobbish has a different meaning from arrogant, so that's why I used the word "snob" to refer to Severus, and I think that word is the right one to use. I'd agree that Sirius, and James less so, is arrogant and haughty. But my sense is that Severus is a snob. He may be arrogant and haughty as well, but that wasn't my point. FWIW, here's a dictionary definition of snobbish: befitting or characteristic of those who are inclined to social exclusiveness and who rebuff the advances of people considered inferior. Whereas I see arrogant as meaning something slightly different. Dictionary says: having or displaying a sense of overbearing self- worth or self-importance; marked by or arising from a feeling or assumption of one's superiority toward others. In that sense, a wizard who values his own purebloodedness and wants to *separate* himself from non-purebloods is a snob, so that description would fit Severus, but not Sirius. IMO Sirius just thinks he's better than *everybody* else, so he is arrogant and haughty, but not necessarily a snob as to social class or pure- bloodedness. If Sirius were a true snob, he wouldn't even want to associate with those he thought were inferior to himself. So he wouldn't be hanging around with a werewolf (Remus) and an apparent toady (Peter). Kim From jlnbtr at yahoo.com Tue Nov 30 03:14:17 2004 From: jlnbtr at yahoo.com (Juli) Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 19:14:17 -0800 (PST) Subject: Another Flint? (Was: When?) Message-ID: <20041130031417.9652.qmail@web53110.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 118856 Juli earlier: >> 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. Charme said: > ...edited... > 1) Young Master Creevy could be a natural animagus > or metamorphagus Juli replies: Never thought of that before, but he still needs a secret passage, or is it usual to see animals around Hogwarts? Maybe a cat, an owl or a frog, but something else? Or maybe he can transform into a beetle like Rita. Anyway, are there any animagus born animagus? I thought they became, like James and Sirius did, and it took them 5 years. And a metamorphmagus wouldn't be helpfull at all, he could take the form of any older student, but wouldn't Filch notice the same person leaving twice? > 2) Dennis and his brother have developed some > advanced magic like apparation > on their own and are poised to be the next "Weasley" > twins for that > generation Maybe, but you CAN'T apparate within the grounds of Hogwarts. > 3) The Creevy brothers could already have found > their own ways out of > Hogwarts (Dennis is TINY - no telling what he could > fit through) Please tell me how, I am busting my brains here and I can't find a way other than the secret passages. I'm sticking to my theory: it's either a Flint or the rules have changed. Juli __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - Helps protect you from nasty viruses. http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From jhnbwmn at hotmail.com Tue Nov 30 05:38:57 2004 From: jhnbwmn at hotmail.com (johnbowman19) Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2004 05:38:57 -0000 Subject: Another Flint? (Was: When?) In-Reply-To: <00f701c4d67c$2540a9a0$6701a8c0@MITRE.ORG> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118857 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "charme" wrote: > >> --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, 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. Not only did Dennis Creevy show up at in Hogsmeade during his second year, he also showed up during GoF, which would be his first year. I do not have the books with me at the moment but I remeber thinking how strange it was that a first year was allowed to go to Hogsmeade. I am pretty sure it was the time Harry went under his invisibility cloak so that people would not stare at him. He mentions the the Creevy brothers changing buttons to Support Harry Potter from Support Cedric Diggory. They were unsucessful to say the least however John who wishes he had the books with him From gbannister10 at aol.com Tue Nov 30 07:50:33 2004 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2004 07:50:33 -0000 Subject: Hogwarts letters Re: Choosing sides In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118858 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "delwynmarch" wrote: Del: > But take Harry for example : he's always known there was something a > bit different about him, but he never seemed bothered by it. Granted, > he had more pressing things on his mind (the Dursleys), but still we > aren't told that he ever felt bad about the strange things that > happened around him or to him. He felt bad when he was punished for > doing them even though he didn't do them consciously, but that's about > it. In fact, when he is told that he is a wizard, he doesn't believe > it at first. He sure doesn't go "Oh ! So *that's* it !". Geoff: Would you really expect him to? Do we always immediately join the dots when we are suddenly presented with unexpected information or situations? Suddenly, out of the blue, in the middle of a stormy night miles from home when he's awake, cold and hungry, Hagrid knocks the door off its hinges and confronts Vernon and Petunia. Harry sees this stranger daring to argue with them and then he is told he's a wizard. Isn't that enough of a gobsmacking to occupy his mind especially with the follow up of the letter and Dudley's tail? He's not suddenly going to say "Stop. Wait. Gee whiz, is that why I grew my hair and finished up on the roof and why the glass disappeared at the Zoo?" That penny might only drop days later when he gets an opportunity to digest all the new information that Hagrid introduces him to - news about his parents, Voldermort, Diagon Alley etc. I think the guy's initially got a bit of an information overload to process..... Geoff http://www.aspectsofexmoor.com Exmoor National Park views, walks and West Somerset Railway steam and diesel views From spaced_out_space_cadet at hotmail.com Tue Nov 30 08:21:27 2004 From: spaced_out_space_cadet at hotmail.com (spacedoutspacecadet) Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2004 08:21:27 -0000 Subject: The Darkness Within Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118859 I know there has been a lot of discussion previously about how 'Slytherin' Hermione has become in regards to her treatment of Rita Skeeter, and in the books there are many mentions of 'good' characters having darker sides, eg. Remus and his werewolf side, Harry and his anger etc. We have also seen people that are quite obviously 'dark' finding the goodness within such as Snape, though one can argue he isn't that 'good' of a character, I am making reference to his work for the Order. Is there room in future Harry Potter books for other 'dark' characters finding the goodness within?? In this I mean them becoming like Snape and not reverting to the 'good' side so that they can escape punishment because they have been park of the 'dark' side. My apologies if this has been discussed earlier, and if it has a link to previous discussions would be appreciated. Spaced Out Space Cadet From bboyminn at yahoo.com Tue Nov 30 08:54:11 2004 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2004 08:54:11 -0000 Subject: Dennis's Great Escape or Another Flint? In-Reply-To: <20041130031417.9652.qmail@web53110.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118860 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Juli wrote: > > Juli earlier: > >> 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. > > Charme said: > > ...edited... > > 1) Young Master Creevy could be a natural animagus > > or metamorphagus > > Juli replies: Never thought of that before, but he > still needs a secret passage, or is it usual to see > animals around Hogwarts? > > 2) Dennis and his brother have developed some > > advanced magic like apparation ... > > Maybe, but you CAN'T apparate within the grounds of > Hogwarts. > > 3) The Creevy brothers could already have found > > their own ways out of > > Hogwarts (Dennis is TINY - no telling what he could > > fit through) > > Please tell me how, I am busting my brains here and I > can't find a way other than the secret passages. > > I'm sticking to my theory: it's either a Flint or the > rules have changed. > > Juli bboyminn: It's all matter of attitude and imagination. If we stand, as readers, outside the wizard world looking in, then we have to assume it was a mistake. But if we put ourselves into the wizard world, at least mentally, as if it were real, then we have two facts bridged by an off-page gap; a gap which must contain a workable truth. The facts are Dennis is a 2nd year and Dennis was in Hogsmeade at the Hogshead Inn, now fill in the gap. So, given the the answer is in an unknown /gap/, we can only fill that gap with speculation. How about something as simple as Dennis got up at 5:00am, snuck out the front door of the castle, and waited for a large crowd to leave the caslte at which time he joined them unseen by Filch who was still busy checking names. That doesn't even require any magic. Like I said in my post - 'Filch standing at the front door checking names would never be enough to stop ... any ... moderately ingenious student'. I also think any speculative solution should fall more into the catagory of schoolboy mischief than extreme or unusual magic. A levitation charm is pretty straight forward and one of the first charm every student learns. Climbing out a window, or sneeking out early is standard schoolboy fair. As I said in the first paragraph, if we look at it from the outside, it is clearly a authoral mistake. However, if JKR were called on this mistake, I'm sure she would do what I did, just make up an answer; it really is does work every time. I think that was her solution to the original FLINT, that is, Markus Flint was at Hogwarts one year longer that he should have been. Solution: JKR simply said he was held back a year, in other words, when in doubt, make it up. If we have Event "A" and Event "C" that seem to contradict each other, and we, in addition, assume that the ficitonal world is real and therefore true, then there must be an event "B" that explains it all. There must be something that creates the logical sequence of A->B->C. Since we haven't been give and likely will not be given Event "B", we can either steadfastly say it is a Flint, or we can make up a likely and logical solution. Personally, I find making up solutions, or what I call 'Logical Expansion of the Wizard World', a lot more fun than harping about author mistakes. I have a great fascination with the parts of the wizard world that occur off-the-page. I have written detail analysis of the wand making art, most of which has been posted here, although along time and many thousands of post ago. In addition, I have taken part in long detailed discussions of business, commerece, import/export, banking, education, manufacturing, Muggle/magic trade, the nature of magical objects, the nature of magical travel, and the list goes on. Many find these conversation and speculations pointless, but I, and others, find them endlessly fascinating and great fun. Just passing it along. Steve/bboyminn (was bboy_mn) From naama_gat at hotmail.com Tue Nov 30 09:42:45 2004 From: naama_gat at hotmail.com (naamagatus) Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2004 09:42:45 -0000 Subject: Trusting characters Re: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118861 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Sharon" wrote: > > > >Naama: > >Why not accept what Sirius said? He was worried when he hadn't >>heard from Peter. It was imperative to find out whether Peter was >>captured -since Peter was the Secret Keeper, he was the only one who >>could endanger the Potters. > > < > Something I just discovered this evening, which might interest you: > Chp 19 PoA, Sirius: "The night [James and Lily] died, I'd arranged to check on Peter, make sure he was still safe..." > > It wasn't a spur of the moment thing. Sirius wasn't just dropping by because he'd suddenly had a bad feeling, or because he was getting > antsy. He wasn't even feeling particularly worried about Peter when he went to look for him, until after he'd arrived. Why? Because he'd *planned* to be there - and what's more, Peter *knew* that Sirius would be stopping by. (Who else would Sirius >have "arranged" the meeting with, the Easter Bunn)? > > Pretending I'm Sirius for a moment: I have, on schedule, showed up at the SK's house, who isn't there. Maybe I wait around for a few > minutes, thinking perhaps Peter has popped out for a drink or a loaf of bread. But time goes by, and Peter's still gone, and I'm getting worried, and then my Spidey-sense starts tingling...and I go straight to GH. To find it a ruined mass of burnt lumber.... > > Now, it's all well and good if Sirius wanted to see if Peter had been captured. But if that was the case, why did he go to GH first? Why didn't he go to Dumbledore? "Yo, Dumbledude, we screwed up and > Peter's captured, I think." > > At that point, Sirius wasn't worried about Peter - he was worried > about James and Lily. If Peter was captured, there is not much Sirius can do for him. But if he is captured, it may be that at that very moment he is telling Voldemort where the Potters are, exposing them to attack. It makes perfect, total sense for Sirius at that moment to rush over to the Potters. As for contacing DD - we've seen in OotP that order members went to Harry's help on their own initiative, not waiting for DD to tell what to do. If Sirius thought that the Potters were in danger, rushing to their aid was the right thing to do. > > 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? Maybe. Or not. In any case, he would know the location of where they were hiding. > > > >Naama: > >And who else could have been sent to check on > Peter? The Potters were the target, so they certainly couldn't leave > their hiding place, and Lupin wasn't trusted. It had to be Sirius. > And if Peter had been captured, there's obviously no need for Sirius > to continue being the decoy and remain in hiding. > > > > True, very true. Sirius was in the free and clear to run around like crazy once he knew Peter had been compromised. But being a decoy and remaining in hiding are two entirely different things: being a decoy involves being *seen* by the enemy, to lure them in a different direction. Hiding involves staying low, staying out of sight, staying safe. Sirius had to have been doing one or the other No. You are taking 'decoy' too literaly, as thought Voldemort is a dog that follows a physical trail. Sirius functions as decoy simply by being the most likely person to be the Potters' Secrect Keeper. Assuming that Voldemort would be focused on finding Sirius, hiding as well as he can will force Voldemort to put more energy, more time, more attention to trying to find him. It makes things safer for Peter, too, that Voldemort will focus on searching for him (besides making it safer for Sirius, obviously). Naama From naama_gat at hotmail.com Tue Nov 30 09:55:59 2004 From: naama_gat at hotmail.com (naamagatus) Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2004 09:55:59 -0000 Subject: Knowing it was Snape (was: What has Snape seen) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118862 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "cubfanbudwoman" wrote: >> > > 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! > Nah. Go with your intuition here, SSSusan. The ball scene and its prologues was structured towards that (rather cliche) surprise of pretty!Hermione. The Occlumens lessons are structured to reveal a subtle symmetry between Snape and Harry. Snape glimpses harsh childhood memories of Harry; Harry glimpses harsh childhood memories of Snape's. Harry was humiliated, Snape was humiliated. So, when we see a little boy crying in Snape's memory, after we'd seen Harry chased by a dog and stranded on a tree, it's Snape who is the little boy. Naama From azriona at juno.com Tue Nov 30 10:40:10 2004 From: azriona at juno.com (Sharon) Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2004 10:40:10 -0000 Subject: Trusting characters Re: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118863 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "cubfanbudwoman" wrote: > > SSSusan: > > > 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. > > Magda: > > I don't think anyone really believes that he was evil or a > > double-crosser or a coward. And his case as presented does make > > sense and all of his actions are very much in character. > > > SSSusan: > Oh, but some do believe this! Several posters have proposed ESE! > Sirius and even just within the last couple of day's worth of posts > folks have talked about what a coward he was--saying he *pretended* > to be willing to die for his friends but actually setting Peter up > to be killed while he [Sirius] could run & hide. For the record, I don't actually buy the ESE! Sirius theory. (Nor do I go in for ESE!Lupin.) Do I think Sirius was bullheaded, stupid, and cowardly? Yup. Do I think he meant for James and Lily to die? Not a chance. He did what he *thought* was right - he just has his priorities in the wrong places, and his trust in the wrong people. --azriona From azriona at juno.com Tue Nov 30 10:59:53 2004 From: azriona at juno.com (Sharon) Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2004 10:59:53 -0000 Subject: Trusting characters Re: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118864 >Naama: > If Peter was captured, there is not much Sirius can do for him. But > if he is captured, it may be that at that very moment he is telling > Voldemort where the Potters are, exposing them to attack. It makes > perfect, total sense for Sirius at that moment to rush over to the > Potters. No, actually, it doesn't. 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. Naama: > As for contacing DD - we've seen in OotP that order members went to > Harry's help on their own initiative, not waiting for DD to tell what > to do. If Sirius thought that the Potters were in danger, rushing to > their aid was the right thing to do. >From Chp 37, OoP: Dumbledore: "You see, when you gave Professor Snape that cryptic warning, he realized that you had had a vision of Sirius trapped in the bowels of the Department of Mysteries. He, like you, attempted to contact Sirius at once...Alastor Moody, Nymphadora Tonks, Kingsley Shacklebolt, and Remus Lupin were at headquarters when he made contact. All agreed to go to your aid at once. Professor Snape requested that Sirius remain behind, as he needed somebody to remain to headquarters to tell me what had happened, for I was due there at any moment." Did they wait for DD's orders - even though DD was shortly to arrive at HQ? No, I'll concede that. But they did not follow Harry on a spur of the moment decision. Moreover, it was a *group* decision not to go, and it was a decision made by clearer heads than Sirius - Moody and Kingsley both are very intelligent and analytical. One can assume that Moody and Severus are both highly trusted by DD, and very possibly have the authority to make this sort of decision, particularly in DD's absence. Going to the MoM was not a single person taking initiative based upon scanty evidence and passionate feelings, as Sirius' decision to go to GH was. It was the carefully determined conclusion to a problem which needed to be solved - and quickly. > > > Azriona: > > 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? > Naama: > Maybe. Or not. In any case, he would know the location of where they > were hiding. > > Right, but remember the whole concept of the FC was that even if you did know where a person was, unless you had been told the Secret by the SK themselves, you could look right in the windows and never actually see them. Sirius may have *known* that James and Lily were at GH, but unless Peter chose to tell him, he wouldn't have been able to see them. > > > > >Naama: Sirius functions as decoy simply > by being the most likely person to be the Potters' Secrect Keeper. > Assuming that Voldemort would be focused on finding Sirius, hiding as > well as he can will force Voldemort to put more energy, more time, > more attention to trying to find him. It makes things safer for > Peter, too, that Voldemort will focus on searching for him (besides > making it safer for Sirius, obviously). > > Ah, I see what you mean by 'decoy', then. But my original argument still stands - if Sirius is the decoy, it's any amount of stupid for him to be the one to check on Peter with any amount of regularity. First, because remaining out of sight means not having a regular schedule (or pre-arranging meeting times, as Sirius did with Peter); second, because in order to keep Peter completely safe from harm, he needs to remain out of contact with Sirius anyway. These guys have obviously been watching way too many Bond movies. --azriona From azriona at juno.com Tue Nov 30 11:15:16 2004 From: azriona at juno.com (Sharon) Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2004 11:15:16 -0000 Subject: The Darkness Within In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118865 Spaced Out Space Cadet: Is there room in future Harry Potter books for other 'dark' > characters finding the goodness within?? In this I mean them becoming > like Snape and not reverting to the 'good' side so that they can > escape punishment because they have been park of the 'dark' side. Oh, sure. Go take a spin on any of the thousands of fanfiction sites (like FA) and you'll find hundreds, if not thousands, of stories centering on Draco Malfoy waking up one day and suddenly realizing that he hates Voldy and doesn't want to be a DE, and what's more, he's desperately in love with Hermione/Ginny/Harry. *shudders* Beyond that, yes, there are loads of chances for "evil" characters to suddenly have a good side. Maybe they won't go all-good, exactly - they might not work for DD in the end, but at least they'll show they have a heart. Take, for instance, Peter Pettigrew. (Like I'd bring up anyone else.) Peter still owes his life to Harry, and still had to return the favor Harry gave him in the Shrieking Shack. It is entirely possible that Peter, in returning the favor and making good on the debt in either Book 6 or Book 7 (I'm betting on Six, myself) will end by saving Harry's life. Perhaps this isn't quite working for DD, but it's sure showing that he's got a heart, or at least a keen sense of fair play. --azriona From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Tue Nov 30 11:49:48 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2004 11:49:48 -0000 Subject: Trusting characters Re: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118866 Naama: > > If Peter was captured, there is not much Sirius can do for him. > > But if he is captured, it may be that at that very moment he is > > telling Voldemort where the Potters are, exposing them to > > attack. It makes perfect, total sense for Sirius at that moment > > to rush over to the Potters. Azriona: > No, actually, it doesn't. 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. SSSusan: I don't agree with this remark. As it was pointed out earlier, Sirius had *arranged* to meet Peter this night, to check on him. For Peter to have sauntered away for tea -- or anything short of an emergency -- without letting Sirius know would have been pretty ridiculous in time of war. *Just* as people are saying Sirius should've reported in to DD before heading to GH, likewise Peter would've been expected to contact Sirius if he couldn't keep their appointment. No, when Peter didn't contact him and then subsequently wasn't there at their appointed time and place, I don't blame Sirius for presuming the worst -- and acting. Stupid to go solo? Rash to forget the FC? Of course. But I'd argue it was also quite "human nature" to have been overcome with worry & horror and to have gone with the intention to see if the worst had come to his dear friends/if there was anything he could do. Siriusly Snapey Susan From azriona at juno.com Tue Nov 30 12:43:46 2004 From: azriona at juno.com (Sharon) Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2004 12:43:46 -0000 Subject: Trusting characters Re: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118867 > Naama: > > > If Peter was captured, there is not much Sirius can do for him. > > > But if he is captured, it may be that at that very moment he is > > > telling Voldemort where the Potters are, exposing them to > > > attack. It makes perfect, total sense for Sirius at that moment > > > to rush over to the Potters. > > Azriona: > > No, actually, it doesn't. 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. > > > SSSusan: > I don't agree with this remark. As it was pointed out earlier, > Sirius had *arranged* to meet Peter this night, to check on him. *smacks forehead* Yeah, and that would have been me who originally pointed out that Sirius and Peter had *arranged* to meet on that night. Call it momentary lapse of memory on my part. Would Peter have stepped out for something as inconsequential as tea, knowing the Sirius was on his way? No, of course not. But he might have been called out for something more important - and yes, I'll even agree that it could have been something that didn't bode well for James and Lily. But it could also have been something as innocuous as a private meeting with DD - one which left no time to contact Sirius to tell him of the change in plans. Yeah, it's a stretch. It still doesn't let Sirius off the hook. --azriona From Vivamus at TaprootTech.com Tue Nov 30 13:18:10 2004 From: Vivamus at TaprootTech.com (Vivamus) Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2004 08:18:10 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Dennis's Great Escape or Another Flint? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041130081967.SM01064@devbox> No: HPFGUIDX 118868 > > > Charme: > > > 3) The Creevy brothers could already have found > > > their own ways out of > > > Hogwarts (Dennis is TINY - no telling what he could > > > fit through) > > Juli: > > Please tell me how, I am busting my brains here and I > > can't find a way other than the secret passages. > > > > I'm sticking to my theory: it's either a Flint or the > > rules have changed. > bboyminn: . . . Good stuff snipped . . . > Like I said in my post - 'Filch standing at the front door checking > names would never be enough to stop ... any ... moderately ingenious > student'. > > I also think any speculative solution should fall more into the > catagory of schoolboy mischief than extreme or unusual magic. A > levitation charm is pretty straight forward and one of the first charm > every student learns. Climbing out a window, or sneeking out early is > standard schoolboy fair. I think you are spot-on, bboyminn. When I think about how much thought and creativity my friends and I put into outsmarting our elders when I was a teenager, and add onto that all of the additional abilities of school-boy-level magic, the possibilities become limitless. As a very wise person once said, even the most controlling adults might spend five or ten minutes out of the day trying to outsmart kids. Kids, on the other hand, while they lack adult experience, can work on outsmarting adults full-time. Unlike Snape, Filch does not seem very bright, so outmaneuvering him would be (literally) child's play. One thing that does puzzle me, though, is why no one could figure out how to submit their names into the GoF. About a dozen ways to do that *without* using magic occurred to me, assuming simple things like Wingardium Leviosa wouldn't work. Vivamus, whose cat Snickersqueak can no longer levitate, but he still dreams about it From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Tue Nov 30 13:29:26 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2004 13:29:26 -0000 Subject: Trusting characters Re: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118869 Azriona: > > > No, actually, it doesn't. 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. SSSusan: > > I don't agree with this remark. As it was pointed out earlier, > > Sirius had *arranged* to meet Peter this night, to check on him. Azriona responds: > *smacks forehead* Yeah, and that would have been me who originally > pointed out that Sirius and Peter had *arranged* to meet on that > night. Call it momentary lapse of memory on my part. > > Would Peter have stepped out for something as inconsequential as > tea, knowing the Sirius was on his way? No, of course not. But he > might have been called out for something more important - and yes, > I'll even agree that it could have been something that didn't bode > well for James and Lily. But it could also have been something as > innocuous as a private meeting with DD - one which left no time to > contact Sirius to tell him of the change in plans. > > Yeah, it's a stretch. It still doesn't let Sirius off the hook. 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? To me, it seems pretty natural for a take-charge, action-oriented guy like Sirius, who I truly believe loved James like a brother & Lily about as much, who was godfather to Harry, to have taken off to investigate. We don't know exactly how he arrived there; we don't know whether he arrived right smack dab out there in the open or whether he planned to sneak up surreptitiously...until he saw the demolished house. So I guess I don't think he needs to be let off the hook for anything much, really, in *this* scene. My other quibble with your position has to do with something you suggested a couple of posts back -- that Sirius could've contacted DD and said that Peter was missing, that Peter was the SK, and that he was worried about J/L/H. I guess my first question is: Would it have been right to have gone that far and spilled all those beans, not yet knowing where Peter was or what had happened? If it turned out to be nothing, they'd have had to start over with a new SK/FC scheme, wouldn't they? And my second question is that on one hand you seem to be arguing that Sirius should have taken the time to contact DD if he was going to rush off to GH, but on the other hand you're saying that there might not have been time for Peter to have contacted Sirius to call off their meeting. Isn't that a double standard? [BTW, bring up other Sirius scenes--such as when he goaded Harry by saying *James* would have done such & so, and I might agree that he should be kept on the hook!] Siriusly Snapey Susan From quigonginger at yahoo.com Tue Nov 30 14:15:51 2004 From: quigonginger at yahoo.com (quigonginger) Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2004 14:15:51 -0000 Subject: Another Flint? (Was: When?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118870 John wondered: > Not only did Dennis Creevy show up at in Hogsmeade during his second > year, he also showed up during GoF, which would be his first year. I > do not have the books with me at the moment but I remeber thinking how > strange it was that a first year was allowed to go to Hogsmeade. I am > pretty sure it was the time Harry went under his invisibility cloak so > that people would not stare at him. He mentions the the Creevy > brothers changing buttons to Support Harry Potter from Support Cedric > Diggory. They were unsucessful to say the least however > John who wishes he had the books with him Ginger, who has book in hand, responds: Sorry John, you're close, but no cigar. Right after the Hogsmeade trip you mention (ch 19, the Hungarian Horntail), Harry goes to see Hagrid. It is mentioned as he sneaks out that the Creevy brothers were trying to bewitch the buttons. After he returns, the Creevys have gone to bed, but the buttons remain. You were correct that they were unsuccessful. Any bets that an older student performed a disillusionment charm on little Dennis so he could get to the DA meeting? Ginger, who really needs to reread GoF. From finwitch at yahoo.com Tue Nov 30 15:00:00 2004 From: finwitch at yahoo.com (finwitch) Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2004 15:00:00 -0000 Subject: Sirius in! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118871 SSSusan wrote: > [BTW, bring up other Sirius scenes--such as when he goaded Harry by > saying *James* would have done such & so, and I might agree that he > should be kept on the hook!] I just hope that Veil thing was a trick, not Sirius' death. Anyway, Sirius fans find their kind at Immeritus at http://pages.prodigy.net/siriusblack/ - found it via JKR's fansite- links... And - I like Sirius - I hope Harry could have gone to live with him instead of Dursleys, even if the rat escaped... but oh well - I still await for the 6th book - and the 7th. Finwitch From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com Tue Nov 30 15:07:21 2004 From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (arrowsmithbt) Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2004 15:07:21 -0000 Subject: Trusting characters Re: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118872 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "cubfanbudwoman" wrote: > > To me, it seems pretty natural for a take-charge, action-oriented guy > like Sirius, who I truly believe loved James like a brother & Lily > about as much, who was godfather to Harry, to have taken off to > investigate. We don't know exactly how he arrived there; we don't > know whether he arrived right smack dab out there in the open or > whether he planned to sneak up surreptitiously...until he saw the > demolished house. So I guess I don't think he needs to be let off > the hook for anything much, really, in *this* scene. > Kneasy: Don't know how he got here? Motorbike, surely. That's what Hagrid borrowed to transport Harry to Privet Drive IIRC. Now how someone can be sneaking around on a machine that can be heard half-a-mile away defeats me. He might as well have put an advert in the Daily Prophet. Hardly surreptitious. To my mind the most interesting question is "why did he arrange to meet Peter?" For his plan to work all contact should be broken, nothing should link Sirius to any of the Potter's *other* friends, 'cos if Sirius can't be found, what's Voldy gonna do? Check up on the others, of course; Sirius could be hiding out with them. No; I prefer to think that checking up on Peter was more than just normal activity. Peter missing would mean Voldy had struck and Sirius could arrive at GH with a suitably shocked expression. Sirius may be able to salve his conscience by saying he didn't betray James and Lily directly, but I do think it probable that he pointed Voldy in the direction of Peter or already knew that Peter was in Voldy's pocket. From aletamay01 at yahoo.com Tue Nov 30 15:12:52 2004 From: aletamay01 at yahoo.com (hogsheadbarmaid) Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2004 15:12:52 -0000 Subject: Hogwarts letters Re: Choosing sides In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118873 Alla wrote : " 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." 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. Del barmaid here: What canon is there to back up the idea that Muggleborns must "leave the Muggle World" and be confined withing the WW?? We really know very little about Muggleborns. Harry, although raised in the Muggle world is not Muggle born and is not in any way a good example of what an average kid of either Muggle or Wizarding stock would experiance. Hermione seems to be able go back and forth between worlds very nicely. We see at OoP that the magical world and the Muggle world are "closer" to each other, more intwined, than we would have thought up to that point. --barmaid From finwitch at yahoo.com Tue Nov 30 15:29:15 2004 From: finwitch at yahoo.com (finwitch) Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2004 15:29:15 -0000 Subject: Trusting characters Re: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118874 > > Kneasy: > Don't know how he got here? > Motorbike, surely. > That's what Hagrid borrowed to transport Harry to Privet Drive IIRC. Finwitch: That's right-- and of course, Hagrid flew it to the rock to give Harry his letter. Don't know what happened to it later. Maybe Hagrid took the boat back to get the bike - and flew to Hogwarts... Where is it now? Kneasy: > Now how someone can be sneaking around on a machine that can be > heard half-a-mile away defeats me. He might as well have put an advert > in the Daily Prophet. Hardly surreptitious. Finwitch: How do you know the bike doesn't have a silencer? It runs on magic, not gas - and since they can make things invisible (Ford Anglia has Invisibility Booster, set in by Arthur Weasley - I'm positive Sirius' bike has one, too), making things silent should be easy. Kneasy: > To my mind the most interesting question is "why did he arrange to > meet Peter?" For his plan to work all contact should be broken, nothing > should link Sirius to any of the Potter's *other* friends, 'cos if Sirius > can't be found, what's Voldy gonna do? Check up on the others, of > course; Sirius could be hiding out with them. Finwitch: I don't think it was. Sirius needs to check on Peter in order to find out if he's captured so that Potters could possibly be warned in time. (And don't forget their animagus ability, as a rat *hiding* is pretty easy for Peter). Peter may have been hiding in a rat-nest, in (seemingly) abandoned barn-house full of rats or whatever. No, Sirius went to check on him on a pre-arranged place on pre-arranged time (possibly agreed upon when the FC was set). Peter wasn't there, so Sirius gets to the Potters. And - since there WAS hope for Sirius to find James & Lily & Harry alive if he was quick enough, so he *can't* waste time in alerting anyone. And how do we know that Pettigrew's hiding-place wasn't ALSO under FC, with Sirius as SK? Finwitch From finwitch at yahoo.com Tue Nov 30 15:48:19 2004 From: finwitch at yahoo.com (finwitch) Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2004 15:48:19 -0000 Subject: Does Viktor Krum become an important character?/Tonks In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118875 > Valky: > With the release of HBP becoming ever more imminent I am getting an > itch to start punting my surebet predictions for it. > This would have to be my first one. > Vicky will appear before Chapter Three, and he will be on the side > of good. OOtP was his final year at Durmstrang so he is free and of > age to be whomever he pleases, and he wants to help Harry. > > I predict that by the end of Spinners end we will discover that > Hermione has already convinced Vicky to approach DD with his offer > to help the fight against LV; and that since we last saw him in GOF > he has put extra work into learning to shake off the Imperius. Finwitch: I sure would if I were him - and er - maybe Viktor will teach a NEWT class if someone got a less grade for an OWL than Snape/McGonagall require? (And we *don't* know if other teachers require even A or higher for a NEWT class, but if they do, well...) I think Viktor *might* be teaching them. Anyway... perhaps he will become important character. Perhaps an assistant-Potions-teacher? 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). Finwitch From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Tue Nov 30 15:56:12 2004 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2004 15:56:12 -0000 Subject: Trusting characters Re: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118876 Kneasy: > > Don't know how he got here? > > Motorbike, surely. > > That's what Hagrid borrowed to transport Harry to Privet Drive > > IIRC. > > Now how someone can be sneaking around on a machine that can be > > heard half-a-mile away defeats me. He might as well have put an > > advert in the Daily Prophet. Hardly surreptitious. SSSusan: Yes, the *mechanism* was the motorbike. And though Finwitch makes a good point about the possibility of silencing it, as the FA was made invisible, I was really referring to whether he burst upon the scene, loud & "intact" as it were, seen by all, or whether he might have taken some precaution against being seen/heard. For instance, Sirius could have ridden the motorbike to w/in a certain distance, then transformed into Padfoot and bounded the rest of the way. He'd be disguised then, no? Kneasy: > > To my mind the most interesting question is "why did he arrange to > > meet Peter?" For his plan to work all contact should be broken, > > nothing should link Sirius to any of the Potter's *other* > > friends, 'cos if Sirius can't be found, what's Voldy gonna do? > > Check up on the others, of course; Sirius could be hiding out > > with them. Finwitch: > I don't think it was. Sirius needs to check on Peter in order to > find out if he's captured so that Potters could possibly be warned > in time. SSSusan: That's a fair question, Kneasy, and one which would need to be answered if Sirius is to be "forgiven." I am assuming that Sirius didn't *hang around* with Peter & the Potters' other friends once FC was in place, but rather that the meeting w/ Peter was planned to be brief and clandestine, at a secluded and/or protected spot. I also think Finwitch has given a reasonable answer here for why Sirius might have arranged the meeting. It may seem stupid to have wanted to check on Peter, but I think Sirius saw it precisely as the back-up protection for J/L/H that Finwitch mentions. Kneasy: > No; I prefer to think that checking up on Peter was more than just > normal activity. Peter missing would mean Voldy had struck and > Sirius could arrive at GH with a suitably shocked expression. Sirius > may be able to salve his conscience by saying he didn't betray James > and Lily directly, but I do think it probable that he pointed Voldy > in the direction of Peter or already knew that Peter was in Voldy's > pocket. SSSusan: Oh, you're such an incorrigible conspiracy theorist! ;-) And I prefer to take Sirius at his word and to believe that he was truly horror-struck and grieved by the deaths of J&L and hysterically bent upon retribution when he dashed off to find Peter, whom he (for the first time) suspected of disloyalty. That's my story, anyway. Siriusly Snapey Susan From R.Vink2 at chello.nl Tue Nov 30 15:57:38 2004 From: R.Vink2 at chello.nl (Renee) Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2004 15:57:38 -0000 Subject: Does Viktor Krum become an important character? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118877 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "mommystery2003" wrote: Ces: > 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. I don't think Fleur's > sister was there the entire time, but who knows? > > > > > Del replies : > > Don't be so hard on him. He's a foreigner remember ? I happen to be a > > transplant myself : there are names in this country I have a very hard > > time pronouncing, and many people have a hard time pronouncing my > > name. My in-laws even had to invent a more local-sounding variation > of my name, because they just couldn't get it ! There are different > > sounds, different spellings, and so on, and all of those can really > > create barriers. > > Viktor strikes me as not being particularly gifted on a linguistic > > level (well, pretty much all foreigners seem to share in that > weakness > > in the Potterverse - I mean, Fleur didn't even figure out the use of > > the letter H in English after spending several months at > Hogwarts !), > > so I would think we could cut him some slack. Ces: > > 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 > > Ces - who thinks she and Del will just have to agree to disagree > about Viktor Krum! 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 From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com Tue Nov 30 15:59:39 2004 From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (arrowsmithbt) Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2004 15:59:39 -0000 Subject: Trusting characters Re: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118878 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "finwitch" wrote: > > Finwitch: > How do you know the bike doesn't have a silencer? It runs on magic, > not gas - and since they can make things invisible (Ford Anglia has > Invisibility Booster, set in by Arthur Weasley - I'm positive Sirius' > bike has one, too), making things silent should be easy. > Kneasy: PS/SS chap.1 A low rumbling sound had broken the silence around them. It grew steadily louder as they looked up and down the street for some sign of a headlight; it swelled to a roar as they both looked up at the sky - and a huge motorbike fell out of the air and landed in the road in front of them. > Finwitch: > > I don't think it was. Sirius needs to check on Peter in order to find > out if he's captured so that Potters could possibly be warned in > time. (And don't forget their animagus ability, as a rat *hiding* is > pretty easy for Peter). Peter may have been hiding in a rat-nest, in > (seemingly) abandoned barn-house full of rats or whatever. No, Sirius > went to check on him on a pre-arranged place on pre-arranged time > (possibly agreed upon when the FC was set). Peter wasn't there, so > Sirius gets to the Potters. And - since there WAS hope for Sirius to > find James & Lily & Harry alive if he was quick enough, so he *can't* > waste time in alerting anyone. > Kneasy: Sorry, it's all too convenient - for Sirius. There is zero back-up for any part of the tale he tells about that night. I don't trust him. I understand that there're loads of fans that think Sirius is a slightly dented tragi-hero; they *want* him to be innocent. But until there's some *objective* evidence or support from his story from a trustworthy character, I'm gonna keep my scepticism polished. Besides, it's entertaining countering the Siriophiles. > And how do we know that Pettigrew's hiding-place wasn't ALSO under > FC, with Sirius as SK? Kneasy: You really believe that? From ms_melanie1999 at yahoo.com Tue Nov 30 16:21:45 2004 From: ms_melanie1999 at yahoo.com (Miss Melanie) Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2004 08:21:45 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Trusting characters Re: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041130162145.30747.qmail@web53401.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 118879 Kneasy? wrote: No; I prefer to think that checking up on Peter was more than just normal activity. Peter missing would mean Voldy had struck and Sirius could arrive at GH with a suitably shocked _expression. Sirius may be able to salve his conscience by saying he didn't betray James and Lily directly, but I do think it probable that he pointed Voldy in the direction of Peter or already knew that Peter was in Voldy's pocket. My reply: That's just really a ludricrous thought. You guys aren't happy with Lupin, he's not evil enough so now you have to make a dead person more evil. I truly do not believe he did that to Lily or James, come on! Do you honestly think that JK Rowlings would talk so fondly of Sirius if this had been the case? I think the story we were told is the true one. I don't think he meant any harm on his friends. I think that James and Lily were the smart, and loyal friends that we are told they were. At the same time James was of pure ancestory we see it their is bigotry, even in the Weasley family and if you want sources I will source you, it is likely that they really believed that Lupin had been a traitor. It's a sad irony that it is not the case. I truly believe that James and Lily had every reason to trust Sirius implicity more than we will probably ever see in the books. That is what the bond between two best friends is stronger than that of the others, you do trust some friends more than others. These were two boys that were beyond friends they were brothers they had spent not only their days in the Gryffindor towers together but also in the summers too. I realize family can betray but I refuse to believe that Sirius did...this is a man that would probably do anything to hold onto the family that he has formed on his own. ~Melanie --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - You care about security. So do we. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From jhnbwmn at hotmail.com Tue Nov 30 16:52:58 2004 From: jhnbwmn at hotmail.com (johnbowman19) Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2004 16:52:58 -0000 Subject: Another Flint? (Was: When?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118880 > Ginger, who has book in hand, responds: > > Sorry John, you're close, but no cigar. Right after the Hogsmeade > trip you mention (ch 19, the Hungarian Horntail), Harry goes to see > Hagrid. It is mentioned as he sneaks out that the Creevy brothers > were trying to bewitch the buttons. After he returns, the Creevys > have gone to bed, but the buttons remain. You were correct that they > were unsuccessful. > > Any bets that an older student performed a disillusionment charm on > little Dennis so he could get to the DA meeting? > > Ginger, who really needs to reread GoF. Thank you for your correction Ginger. I must have read the paragraphs too fast and they blended together in my head. But to the point, I positive this is a flint. Hogwarts is a place full of tradition in my view, and it does not seem possible that it would change it's age restriction anytime soon. Also preforming a disillusionment seems like highly advanced magic to do on humans (probably NEWT level). And I do not think the brothers would be up to this task nor do I think they would con a 7th year into helping them break the rules. The Fred and George idea holds some wieght due to their love of breaking the rules, but how well do they know the brothers? Would they be willing to break the rules for a seond year who sometimes gives Harry trouble with his idol worship? I don't think they would. John who thinks a flint is no big deal, but changing the rules would change the Hogwarts we know and love. From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Tue Nov 30 16:55:03 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2004 16:55:03 -0000 Subject: The Darkness Within In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118881 > Spaced Out Space Cadet: Is there room in future Harry Potter books for other 'dark' characters finding the goodness within?? In this I mean them becoming like Snape and not reverting to the 'good' side so that they can escape punishment because they have been park of the 'dark' side. Alla: Personally, it would be enough for me if Snape eventually finds the goodness within. Sharon: Oh, sure. Go take a spin on any of the thousands of fanfiction sites (like FA) and you'll find hundreds, if not thousands, of stories centering on Draco Malfoy waking up one day and suddenly realizing that he hates Voldy and doesn't want to be a DE, and what's more, he's desperately in love with Hermione/Ginny/Harry. Alla: Oh, yes. I have very bad reaction to "suddenly reformed" Draco,. but it does not mean that I would not want to see his character redeemed or even just more than 2-D character. Judging on JKR's reactions I would not bet on it though. And yeah, Draco/Hermione or Draco/Ginny ship makes me want to run away from the story and fast. That's what I recently did - I run away from fantastic story solely because author just hinted about Draco/Hermione ship. Sharon: > Beyond that, yes, there are loads of chances for "evil" characters to suddenly have a good side. Maybe they won't go all-good, exactly - they might not work for DD in the end, but at least they'll show they have a heart. Take, for instance, Peter Pettigrew. (Like I'd bring up anyone else.) Peter still owes his life to Harry, and still had to return the favor Harry gave him in the Shrieking Shack. It is entirely possible that Peter, in returning the favor and making good on the debt in either Book 6 or Book 7 (I'm betting on Six, myself) will end by saving Harry's life. Perhaps this isn't quite working for DD, but it's sure showing that he's got a heart, or at least a keen sense of fair play. Alla: Keep in mind is that the following is only mine mostly emotional reading of Peter, whom I dislike immensely. First of all, I concede - it is VERY possible that JKR will make Peter redeem himself somehow, based on her comments that nobody is born evil, etc. To me, though as a CHARACTER, Peter is already beyond redemption, which again is probably incorrect reading of the text, but what can I do? As you probably know, I don't believe in spy!Peter, but only in traitor!Peter, who caused Potters to die. That was bad enough in my book, but after He indeed owed Harry's debt, I was absolutely disgusted by his behaviour at graveyard. That does not prove to me that he has a heart, on the contrary, I think he has a stone instead of heart. Again, Dumbledore did say that Harry will be glad one day that he saved Peter's life, so I am sure he is bound to do SOMETHING for Harry, which will help him at the end, but I just don't see it right now. From azriona at juno.com Tue Nov 30 17:56:45 2004 From: azriona at juno.com (Sharon) Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2004 17:56:45 -0000 Subject: Trusting characters Re: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118882 Azriona: > Would Peter have stepped out for something as inconsequential as > tea, knowing the Sirius was on his way? No, of course not. But he > might have been called out for something more important - and yes, > I'll even agree that it could have been something that didn't bode > well for James and Lily. But it could also have been something as > innocuous as a private meeting with DD - one which left no time to > contact Sirius to tell him of the change in plans. > > Yeah, it's a stretch. It still doesn't let Sirius off the hook. >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. So, no, I'm not letting Sirius off the hook for the irresponsible way this played out. Not once did he take DD into confidence; not once did he trust that DD might have a clue about the best way of going about things; not once did he admit that as a 22 year old kid he knew *zilch*. >SSSusan > My other quibble with your position has to do with something you suggested a couple of posts back -- that Sirius could've contacted DD and said that Peter was missing, that Peter was the SK, and that he was worried about J/L/H. I guess my first question is: Would it have been right to have gone that far and spilled all those beans, not yet knowing where Peter was or what had happened? If it turned out to be nothing, they'd have had to start over with a new SK/FC scheme, wouldn't they? > Depends on how he contacted him. Dumbledore tells Harry that the Order has ways of contacting each other, which are a bit more reliable than Floo. We can imagine that these protections were in use at this time as well. Had Sirius used this method, a new SK would not have necessarily been needed. And he would have been `spilling the beans' to DD, who should have known the beans to begin with. >Kneasy: > I prefer to think that checking up on Peter was more than just normal activity. Peter missing would mean Voldy had struck and Sirius could arrive at GH with a suitably shocked expression. Sirius may be able to salve his conscience by saying he didn't betray James and Lily directly, but I do think it probable that he pointed Voldy in the direction of Peter or already knew that Peter was in Voldy's pocket. > Az: That is so delightfully evil, Kneasy. I take my hat off to you. I don't agree; I think Sirius was just stupid, not evil, but I love it anyway. >Finwitch: > Sirius needs to check on Peter in order to find out if he's captured so that Potters could possibly be warned in time. > Az: Are you talking about for the purpose of the plot, or just in general? Because if it's for the plot, I agree ? Sirius needs to check up on Peter so that he can hightail it over to GH and give the motorbike to Hagrid. But in general? I'm curious why Sirius would be so concerned about Peter being captured so easily. Didn't they trust him to stay hidden? >Finwitch: > And how do we know that Pettigrew's hiding-place wasn't ALSO under FC, with Sirius as SK? > Az: Oooooooooo. That would be so cool. Double SKs. > SSSusan: >Yes, the *mechanism* was the motorbike. And though Finwitch makes a good point about the possibility of silencing it, as the FA was made invisible, I was really referring to whether he burst upon the scene, loud & "intact" as it were, seen by all, or whether he might have taken some precaution against being seen/heard. For instance, Sirius could have ridden the motorbike to w/in a certain distance, then transformed into Padfoot and bounded the rest of the way. He'd be disguised then, no? > Az: I suppose Sirius could have parked a ways off and walked in the rest of the way. And there's certainly a poetic quality about a lone man (or dog) walking over the crest of a hill to see a burnt out ruin of a house, slightly smoking... But wouldn't that take up more time in which he could have been saving James and Lily? Actually, I would imagine that Sirius would have canvassed the area from the air, and seen the smoldering ruins of the house before he landed. And I doubt he made Hagrid walk a mile or two to get it, afterward, or had the presence of mind to tell him where it was, when at that point, his one objective was to *Kill Peter*. >SSSusan > And I prefer to take Sirius at his word and to believe that he was truly horror-struck and grieved by the deaths of J&L and hysterically bent upon retribution when he dashed off to find Peter, whom he (for the first time) suspected of disloyalty. > Az: Agreed, actually. Although I'd say he was hysterical from the moment he discovered Peter was missing. I just wish he'd taken a moment to contact DD first. --azriona From ginnysthe1 at yahoo.com Tue Nov 30 17:59:27 2004 From: ginnysthe1 at yahoo.com (kim reynolds) Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2004 09:59:27 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Trusting characters Re: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs In-Reply-To: <20041130162145.30747.qmail@web53401.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041130175927.68305.qmail@web54106.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 118883 Miss Melanie wrote: That's just really a ludricrous thought. You guys aren't happy with Lupin, he's not evil enough so now you have to make a dead person more evil. I truly do not believe he did that to Lily or James, come on! Do you honestly think that JK Rowlings would talk so fondly of Sirius if this had been the case? I think the story we were told is the true one. I don't think he meant any harm on his friends. I think that James and Lily were the smart, and loyal friends that we are told they were. At the same time James was of pure ancestory we see it their is bigotry, even in the Weasley family and if you want sources I will source you, it is likely that they really believed that Lupin had been a traitor. It's a sad irony that it is not the case. I truly believe that James and Lily had every reason to trust Sirius implicity more than we will probably ever see in the books. That is what the bond between two best friends is stronger than that of the others, you do trust some friends more than others. These were two boys that were beyond friends they were brothers they had spent not only their days in the Gryffindor towers together but also in the summers too. I realize family can betray but I refuse to believe that Sirius did...this is a man that would probably do anything to hold onto the family that he has formed on his own. Kim here: I'm with Melanie on this too. I've never seen Sirius as perfect and that imperfection is the source of his mistakes, not some ulterior motive to betray the Potters or anyone else he holds dear. Of course I don't mind that people speculate with all kinds of seemingly inconsistent character analyses about Sirius, Lupin, et al. That's the fun of this list, the speculations, no matter how far-fetched they may seem to some of us. Nevertheless, as to Sirius betraying the Potters, it still doesn't fit his overall character as it's been shown in the books many times. I mean, his animagus is a dog, no less. Who could be more loyal to his mates than a dog? And I truly believe he loves Harry and wants the best for him. Sirius is just rash, arrogant, impetuous, etc. and those traits could easily lead to his instances of poor judgment. He's not perfect (and that's why I love him so... :-) But what a bore these books would be if everyone was perfect. OTOH, JKR has been known to fool us mercilessly -- what a strange twist it was for Moody to turn out to be Barty Jr. underneath. But I can't see her doing something that outlandish with Sirius. Cheers, Kim --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Meet the all-new My Yahoo! ? Try it today! [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From azriona at juno.com Tue Nov 30 18:02:55 2004 From: azriona at juno.com (Sharon) Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2004 18:02:55 -0000 Subject: The Darkness Within In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118884 > Alla: > > Keep in mind is that the following is only mine mostly emotional > reading of Peter, whom I dislike immensely. > I can accept that. *grin* Thanks for the warning. > Alla: > First of all, I concede - it is VERY possible that JKR will make > Peter redeem himself somehow, based on her comments that nobody is > born evil, etc. > > To me, though as a CHARACTER, Peter is already beyond redemption, > which again is probably incorrect reading of the text, but what can I > do? Other than reading it again, with the proper goggles, not much. Although I'd ask for an open mind when discussing Peter, but you seem to have that already! > Alla: > As you probably know, I don't believe in spy!Peter, but only in > traitor!Peter, who caused Potters to die. That was bad enough in my > book, but after He indeed owed Harry's debt, I was absolutely > disgusted by his behaviour at graveyard. > That does not prove to me that he has a heart, on the contrary, I > think he has a stone instead of heart. 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. And what's more, left himself in a position to help Harry bring down Voldy another day. > Alla: > Again, Dumbledore did say that Harry will be glad one day that he > saved Peter's life, so I am sure he is bound to do SOMETHING for > Harry, which will help him at the end, but I just don't see it right > now. Neither do I, honestly. I haven't a clue what Peter will do to redeem himself. My gut instinct is that he'll end up giving up his life for Harry, but I don't know if that's wishful thinking on my part or the logical conclusion to a sticky situation. --azriona From ginnysthe1 at yahoo.com Tue Nov 30 18:44:25 2004 From: ginnysthe1 at yahoo.com (kim reynolds) Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2004 10:44:25 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Trusting characters Re: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041130184425.89223.qmail@web54106.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 118885 Sharon wrote: 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. So, no, I'm not letting Sirius off the hook for the irresponsible way this played out. Not once did he take DD into confidence; not once did he trust that DD might have a clue about the best way of going about things; not once did he admit that as a 22 year old kid he knew *zilch*. >SSSusan wrote: > My other quibble with your position has to do with something you suggested a couple of posts back -- that Sirius could've contacted DD and said that Peter was missing, that Peter was the SK, and that he was worried about J/L/H. I guess my first question is: Would it have been right to have gone that far and spilled all those beans, not yet knowing where Peter was or what had happened? If it turned out to be nothing, they'd have had to start over with a new SK/FC scheme, wouldn't they?< Azriona replied: Depends on how he contacted him. Dumbledore tells Harry that the Order has ways of contacting each other, which are a bit more reliable than Floo. We can imagine that these protections were in use at this time as well. Had Sirius used this method, a new SK would not have necessarily been needed. And he would have been `spilling the beans' to DD, who should have known the beans to begin with. >Kneasy wrote: >I prefer to think that checking up on Peter was more than just normal activity. Peter missing would mean Voldy had struck and Sirius could arrive at GH with a suitably shocked expression. Sirius may be able to salve his conscience by saying he didn't betray James and Lily directly, but I do think it probable that he pointed Voldy in the direction of Peter or already knew that Peter was in Voldy's pocket.< Azriona wrote: That is so delightfully evil, Kneasy. I take my hat off to you. I don't agree; I think Sirius was just stupid, not evil, but I love it anyway. Azriona wrote: I'm curious why Sirius would be so concerned about Peter being captured so easily. Didn't they trust him to stay hidden? >SSSusan wrote: > And I prefer to take Sirius at his word and to believe that he was truly horror-struck and grieved by the deaths of J&L and hysterically bent upon retribution when he dashed off to find Peter, whom he (for the first time) suspected of disloyalty.< Az: Agreed, actually. Although I'd say he was hysterical from the moment he discovered Peter was missing. I just wish he'd taken a moment to contact DD first. Kim asks: I notice a theme of irresponsibility, also stupidity, running through this thread. Does anyone else notice irresponsibility or stupidity on the part of James and Sirius in that they trusted Peter with the secret in the first place? Peter is one of the last people I'd have trusted with a life or death secret. But 22 year olds may not have been wise enough to see that their friend of many years was also a potentially untrustworthy, disloyal brown-noser. Was that the failure of James' and Sirius' arrogance, perhaps? Or maybe desperate times called for desperate (or foolish) measures, so they took a chance with Peter, and lost? Kim __________________________________________________ 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 Tue Nov 30 19:00:07 2004 From: nkafkafi at yahoo.com (nkafkafi) Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2004 19:00:07 -0000 Subject: Trusting characters Re: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118886 > Kneasy: > I understand that there're loads of fans that think Sirius is a slightly > dented tragi-hero; they *want* him to be innocent. But until there's > some *objective* evidence or support from his story from a trustworthy > character, I'm gonna keep my scepticism polished. Neri: Do you mean that some characters ARE actually trustworthy? Wow! I didn't expect such trust from Kneasy... I wonder which characters do you include in this category, and how do you assess their trustworthiness. From soulbrotha at mikaelmartin.com Tue Nov 30 13:37:00 2004 From: soulbrotha at mikaelmartin.com (rockstar064) Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2004 13:37:00 -0000 Subject: McGonagall in OOP. Was; Re: Too "Good" Harry / The resolution of Snape In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118887 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "dumbledore11214" wrote: > > > Lupinlore: > Not at all. I mean McGonagall. Let's see, you have a boy who's > seen one of his classmates die, is kept in the dark, ridiculed in > the paper, and persecuted by a government official/teacher. Now, > you are supposedly a teacher with years of experience in dealing > with adolescent boys, but you seem totally unable to anticipate that > Harry will be hurt and angry, and totally at a loss as to how to > deal with this situation effectively. Granted, there are special > circumstances and you are under orders from Dumbledore to be > circumspect, but the best you can come up with is "Get a grip on > yourself?" NOT impressive. NOT impressive AT ALL. > > > Alla: > > LOL! Thank you. Actually, I completely agree with you. I think that > McGonagall rocked on many points in OOP. I loved how she handled > herself when Umbrdige came to "inspect" her lesson, > during "profession consultation", etc. > > But this remark I indeed consider to be idiotic. I expected MUCH > more from Minerva. Michael: I also think that McGonagall was awesome in OOP. I was cheering her on. But I also think that Harry needed a good "Get a grip on yourself!" I know it must be tough what he's going through; however, Harry isn't calming himself down enough to even grasp the situation at hand. Voldemort's returned, Cedric dead. Only a handful of people believe Harry's story, everyone else thinks Harry's a child with superstar syndrome. Harry saw the way the ministry handled his small misdemeanor with the Patronus charm, practically turning it into a murder trial, and now a ministry official practically running Hogwarts. He should know that the ministry is out to get him and anyone associated with Dumbledore, Dumbledore included. He above all people should already know that he needs to be extra careful now; he's had all summer to think of the implications of Voldemort's return. Now that no one believes his story, it is time to be more cautious rather than act like a lunatic and further confirm the superstar syndrome belief. He should know that Dumbledore's job is on the rocks. He should know that his safety lies in Dumbledore. He should know to be on the down low to keep from hurting Dumbledore & the Order even more. My goodness, Harry, "Get a Grip on yourself!" Yes, Harry IS crucial in everything, and they're telling him nothing, and that's frustrating; but surely he can still grasp the fact that they need to lay low! That should only further emphasize this. No wonder they didn't tell him anything much- look at how he's acting. Thank God they didn't reveal all their plans to him, he would just spew them all out in one angry fit. Did he not grasp all of this? What went wrong? Harry, get a grip on yourself and be thankful for a biscuit. From ikhendley at yahoo.com Tue Nov 30 17:24:49 2004 From: ikhendley at yahoo.com (ikhendley) Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2004 17:24:49 -0000 Subject: Hogwarts letters Re: Choosing sides In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118888 This is not intended to rebut or discuss anything that has thus far been noted. All postings on this topic are thoughtful and insightful, and all affect the decision to attend a school for witches and wizards or not. There are some things, from canon, that I don't believe have been mentioned. We have examples of other Muggle or near-Muggle children in Hogwarts. Seamus Finnigan is half Muggle, half witch (SS/PS, ch 7). His mother is a witch and so can explain the situation to his father. He is not only allowed to attend Hogwarts, but seems happy there. Also, his father didn't know that the woman he married was a witch until after they were wed. She most likely was living in the Muggle world with no problems. Dean Thomas is Muggle-born. He has a poster of his favorite soccer team (West Ham) over his bunk, so presumably he was interested in, and possibly even played, soccer. He also tells Harry at one point that his name was down for Eton, yet he chose Hogwarts. His parents know very little about the WW as evinced by the fact that he doesn't tell them about Cedric Diggory's death, even though he has spent three years there. "They don't know nothing about no deaths at Hogwarts, because I'm not stupid enough to tell them." (OotP, ch 11) We have some evidence that the WW and the Muggle world are not totally separated. In CoS, the MoM tells the Muggle PM that Sirius Black has escaped so that the news can be printed and broadcast to a Muggle audience. This implies some knowledge about the WW at least on the part of the PM. Otherwise, why would he or she accept such information and believe it? Also, Petunia, in discussing her parents reaction to Lily's invitation to Hogwarts, indicated that they were thrilled with the idea of a witch in the family (SS/PS, ch 4). We don't really know, but I expect that some kind of counseling is done with the parents of Muggle-born witches and Wizards before the letter is forthcoming. This counseling may even begin as soon as the child is identified by the MoM, even if it is years before their eleventh birthday. These children are not totally removed from their parents. They can communicate any time and of course go home for holidays and the summer break. So far as working, either in the WW or the Muggle world, this is no different from a normal child growing up and working, either close to home or in a different city or country. They can still visit home and have a mostly normal relationship with their families. There can be problems with all this, I agree. But the characters we're allowed to know so far seem to have worked them out to the satisfaction of both the child and the parents. India From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Tue Nov 30 19:19:08 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2004 19:19:08 -0000 Subject: McGonagall in OOP. Was; Re: Too "Good" Harry / The resolution of Snape In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118889 > Michael: But I also think that Harry needed a good "Get a grip on yourself!" I know it must be tough what he's going through; however, Harry isn't calming himself down enough to even grasp the situation at hand. Voldemort's returned, Cedric dead. Only a handful of people believe Harry's story, everyone else thinks Harry's a child with superstar syndrome. Alla: Could you please clarify how exactly Harry is supposed to calm himself down without any information? Don't you think that all those circumstances do not exactly help him to calm down? Michael: He above all people should already know that he needs to be extra > careful now; he's had all summer to think of the implications of Voldemort's return. Now that no one believes his story, it is time to be more cautious rather than act like a lunatic and further confirm the superstar syndrome belief. He should know that Dumbledore's job is on the rocks. He should know that his safety lies in Dumbledore. He should know to be on the down low to keep from hurting Dumbledore & the Order even more. Alla: I am sorry, but how he supposed to DO all that? He is a fifteen year old, who couple of months ago witnessed the murder of his classmate, he spend all summer searching for ANY news about Voldemort's whereabouts, hoping that ANYBODY will tell him ANYTHING. You are saying he should do all that. I disagree. I think under such circumstances it is very hard to calm down for adult and MUCH harder for teenager. Michael: No wonder they didn't tell him anything much- look at how he's acting. Thank God they didn't reveal all their plans to him, he would just spew them all out in one angry fit. Did he not grasp all of this? What went wrong? Harry, get a grip on yourself and be thankful for a biscuit. Alla: Well, we all know how "them not bothering to tell Harry what is going on" ended. I'd say they better rethink their strategy in the future, because Order is faced with much more danger now than Harry spew their plans out. (Can I ask you to whom, by the way?). From stonehenge.orders at verizon.net Tue Nov 30 19:22:29 2004 From: stonehenge.orders at verizon.net (kjirstem) Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2004 19:22:29 -0000 Subject: Another Flint? (Was: When?) In-Reply-To: <00f701c4d67c$2540a9a0$6701a8c0@MITRE.ORG> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118890 > charme: > > Let's see how many ways the youngest Creevy could have "snuck" out to >Hogsmeade if in fact only 3rd year students and above are allowed to go: > > 1) Young Master Creevy could be a natural animagus or metamorphagus > 2) Dennis and his brother have developed some advanced magic like >apparation on their own and are poised to be the next "Weasley" twins >for that generation > 3) The Creevy brothers could already have found their own ways out >of Hogwarts (Dennis is TINY - no telling what he could fit through) > 4) Could be the Fred & George scenario above, too :) kjirstem: I've wondered if the Creeveys were part house-elf since they are always described as being very small. They seem to have been raised in a muggle household and we're told that their father is a milkman. (In Colin's first conversation with Harry, CS ch 6.) Still, both of them turning up at Hogwarts seems unusual for a Muggle family. It might make more sense if their mother is a house-elf. JKR says in her website FAQ: "House-elves are different from wizards; they have their own brand of magic, and the ability to appear and disappear within the castle is necessary to them..." My thinking (which is seeming fuzzier the longer I go on here) was that house-elves may learn how to apparate (or whatever it is that they do) at an earlier age, perhaps it is easier for them, as well as being possible at Hogwarts. Perhaps Dennis' mother taught him how to do this already... Hmmm. Well, it's strained. kjirstem - who thinks a free house-elf becoming a house wife makes a weird kind of sense. From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Tue Nov 30 19:24:51 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2004 19:24:51 -0000 Subject: The Darkness Within In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118891 Sharon: Other than reading it again, with the proper goggles, not much. Although I'd ask for an open mind when discussing Peter, but you seem to have that already! Alla: LOL! Thanks. Sharon: > 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. And what's more, left himself in a position to help Harry bring down Voldy another day. Alla: Oh, but you see I think that Peter's primary obligation lies with Harry, since he is the one to whom the debt is owed. Peter managed to render Voldy mortal? Very possible, but I am not sure that Peter did that consciously. Is that a given, by the way that with Harry's blood in him, Voldie indeed become mortal? I mean I read theories, but do we have definite canon on it? I am not doubting you, just curious. Azriona: > Neither do I, honestly. I haven't a clue what Peter will do to > redeem himself. My gut instinct is that he'll end up giving up his > life for Harry, but I don't know if that's wishful thinking on my > part or the logical conclusion to a sticky situation. Alla: But I already have one candidate for that role - Snape. :o) I think that would be too many people giving up his life for Harry. :) Although, it is possible too, I suppose From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com Tue Nov 30 19:40:16 2004 From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (arrowsmithbt) Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2004 19:40:16 -0000 Subject: Trusting characters Re: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118892 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "nkafkafi" wrote: > > Neri: > Do you mean that some characters ARE actually trustworthy? Wow! I > didn't expect such trust from Kneasy... I wonder which characters do > you include in this category, and how do you assess their > trustworthiness. Tsk, tsk, tsk. What it is to be considered unremittingly paranoid. Sometimes, yes, always, no. You want a list? OK. Mind you, this is compiled on the understanding that if new information appears all bets are off and a searching re-assessment takes place. 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 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. Kneasy From mgrantwich at yahoo.com Tue Nov 30 19:50:55 2004 From: mgrantwich at yahoo.com (Magda Grantwich) Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2004 11:50:55 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Trusting characters Re: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs In-Reply-To: <20041130184425.89223.qmail@web54106.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041130195055.34704.qmail@web53110.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 118893 > Kim asks: > > I notice a theme of irresponsibility, also stupidity, running > through this thread. Does anyone else notice irresponsibility or > stupidity on the part of James and Sirius in that they trusted > Peter with the secret in the first place? Peter is one of the last > people I'd have trusted with a life or death secret. But 22 year > olds may not have been wise enough to see that their friend of many > years was also a potentially untrustworthy, disloyal brown-noser. > Was that the failure of James' and Sirius' arrogance, perhaps? Or > maybe desperate times called for desperate (or foolish) measures, > so they took a chance with Peter, and lost? I hesitate to use words like "irresponsible" or "stupid" because people get very emotional about what they perceive as an attack on Sirius and James or as doubting the intensity of their feelings about saving the Potters or fighting Voldemort. But I do think that JKR means us to take a good look at how characters perceive things including each other, to look beneath the surfaces and think about whether something is really true or whether its just wishful thinking. I also think that there are similarities sprinkled throughout the series that help us think about characters and their relationships. For instance, we know by now that James and Sirius were very, very close. Finish-each-others-sentences, closer-than-brothers, bestest-mates-for-all-time close. It's very inspiring to have that kind of friendship. But what does that mean in practice? At a minimum, I would suggest it means that you get very good at filtering out other people's input because the two of you have already agreed on something and other people just don't understand the situation or aren't as bright as the two of you are. Sort of like George and Fred, who are another double act that doesn't seem to need anyone else when they decide to do something or pick a course of action. You can get very caught up in your own talents and intelligence, both of which you've received positive feedback for almost since forever and both of which have enabled you to enjoy good marks, an active social life etc. etc. But you sort of forget that although you're quite intelligent, there's more to good judgement than IQ; there's also experience, and discretion, and carefully second-guessing yourself so that you aren't making a mistake. And these latter qualities come with age and maturity. And this is where James and Sirius fell down. They didn't let anyone else into the closed circle of their confidence (if Remus was considered a possible traitor and spy, then it's a sign that there was some kind of distance since Hogwarts), and they didn't subject their assumptions to the severe tire-kicking that was needed in such a (literally) life and death matter. They assumed they knew Peter and that he would die for them as they would for him. (Personally I think Sirius tosses that phrase around far too loosely but I believe he is sincere about it.) We don't know how they came to this conclusion but they did believe it or James would never have agreed to put the safety of his wife and child on the line. Had James and Sirius been 32 rather than 22, they would not have made that mistake. Not only because they would have had more experience of the world and recognized Peter for what he was (an unworthy receptacle of their trust) but also because they would not have casually assumed that even good friends can be trusted to die for each other, that something that serious should not be pledged tritely, and that double-checking and second-guessing are Good Things. Again, I suggest we haven't yet truly appreciated Peter's (possibly sole) talent for reading people properly and pushing their buttons to get them to do what HE wants. Peter is a hell of an actor. Magda __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Read only the mail you want - Yahoo! Mail SpamGuard. http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From ginnysthe1 at yahoo.com Tue Nov 30 20:03:14 2004 From: ginnysthe1 at yahoo.com (kim reynolds) Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2004 12:03:14 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Trusting characters Re: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041130200314.92084.qmail@web54107.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 118894 arrowsmithbt wrote: --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "nkafkafi" wrote: > > Neri: > Do you mean that some characters ARE actually trustworthy? Wow! I > didn't expect such trust from Kneasy... I wonder which characters do > you include in this category, and how do you assess their > trustworthiness. Tsk, tsk, tsk. What it is to be considered unremittingly paranoid. Sometimes, yes, always, no. You want a list? OK. Mind you, this is compiled on the understanding that if new information appears all bets are off and a searching re-assessment takes place. 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 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. Small question for Kneasy: Lockhart on your list of untrustworthies --- is that because you think he may be faking his memory loss? Kim --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Read only the mail you want - Yahoo! Mail SpamGuard. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From nrenka at yahoo.com Tue Nov 30 20:05:54 2004 From: nrenka at yahoo.com (nrenka) Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2004 20:05:54 -0000 Subject: Trusting characters (and the SK switch) In-Reply-To: <20041130195055.34704.qmail@web53110.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118895 > Madga: > And this is where James and Sirius fell down. They didn't let > anyone else into the closed circle of their confidence (if Remus was > considered a possible traitor and spy, then it's a sign that there > was some kind of distance since Hogwarts), and they didn't subject > their assumptions to the severe tire-kicking that was needed in such > a (literally) life and death matter. But there's a third party in this whole incident that no one has (IIRC) mentioned yet: Lily. Given what we know of her personality, I don't think she would have gone along with the plan if she'd thought it were a bad idea. If we want to postulate her as the actual caster of the Fidelius Charm (not unreasonable, given Ollivander's comments; we've been given the payoff of James' wand suited to Transfiguration, so Lily the Charmer would be no surprise), we give her, in a sense, the ultimate say on it. I don't see her as bowing to her husband's will, or being convinced by Sirius' rhetoric, if she had really had strong objections to it. So Peter has to have fooled her too. An interesting situation, all of it. But I am quite sure that Lily must have been in on the whole thing. She's not exactly the passive type (from what we know), to sit around and let others make decisions about her safety and that of her son. I will be very surprised if we don't get some picture of her being deeply in on the whole thing--but that's speculation. I just think it's fairly well-founded speculation. -Nora gets back to the eternal task of writing From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com Tue Nov 30 20:28:55 2004 From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (arrowsmithbt) Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2004 20:28:55 -0000 Subject: Trusting characters Re: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs In-Reply-To: <20041130200314.92084.qmail@web54107.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118896 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, kim reynolds wrote: > > Small question for Kneasy: > > Lockhart on your list of untrustworthies --- is that because > you think he may be faking his memory loss? > > Kim No, but I do think that he'll recover and turn up again later in the books. He was starting to show signs of doing so in the St Mungo's scenes - and Lockhart being Lockhart, it's his ego that comes to the surface first. I really can't see JKR wasting an entertaining character like him, can you? Kneasy From ms_melanie1999 at yahoo.com Tue Nov 30 20:30:27 2004 From: ms_melanie1999 at yahoo.com (Miss Melanie) Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2004 12:30:27 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Trusting characters Re: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041130203027.61550.qmail@web53410.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 118897 Kneasy wrote: Molly as a charharacter of trustworthiness... My replyL It's odd to me that you would be so inclined to not trust a dead person but a you would do trust a woman who has time and time again proven herself to be somewhat stiffiling on her children's behalf. I think Molly Weasley would do just about anything to keep her children safe, but that is not to say that that she would turn in Harry...I have always thought her dislike (and belief in tabloid journalism) would make her inclined to turn Hermione in. ~Melanie --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - Helps protect you from nasty viruses. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From jferer at yahoo.com Tue Nov 30 20:55:38 2004 From: jferer at yahoo.com (Jim Ferer) Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2004 20:55:38 -0000 Subject: Hogwarts letters Re: Choosing sides In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118898 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??" 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 From hannahmarder at yahoo.co.uk Tue Nov 30 21:37:41 2004 From: hannahmarder at yahoo.co.uk (Hannah) Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2004 21:37:41 -0000 Subject: Problem with OotP? (was: Pampering) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118899 > Renee wrote: > "In a fairy tale you can have a bunch of easily identifiable, no- good > kids who show their true colours at the age of eleven. In a more > realistic story, an element like this is somewhat disturbing; it > smacks of predestination. Nor can it be countered by having one or two > 'good' Slytherin students - unless these can act successfully as > advocates of the true values of their house (as opposed to all the > Pureblood nonsense) and effect a change in attitude towards their > house in general. Maybe that's what the Sorting Hat's new song is > pointing to. I do hope Book 6 will undermine the idea that one out of > four kids chooses to be a potential terrorist at the age of 11." > > Del replied : > I completely agree. > > I was particularly dismayed in OoP when not a single Slytherin became > a DA. That points only to 2 possibilities as far as I can see : > > - Students from Gryffindor, Ravenclaw and Hufflepuff don't associate > with the Slytherins. Or at least, those students that became DA don't > associate with Slytherins. > > - Some of the DA associate with some Slytherins but those DA members > didn't deem those Slytherins trustworthy enough to tell them about the DA. > > In either case, it implies that Slytherin is indeed an evil House out > of which no good can come. Needless to say, I don't like it. And I > REALLY hope a good Slytherin will integrate Harry's circle in HBP (not > necessarily the inner circle -the Group of 6-, but the DA for example). Hannah: Yes, and add to that the 'evil' Inquisitorial Squad seems to be made up entirely of Slytherins. Why? Is it because their reputation preceded them, and Umbridge chose just Slytherins out of the old fashioned house prejudice no doubt instilled into her as a child at the school? Or was it because the only 'nasty' students in the school happened to be in Slytherin? The IQ irritated me for that very reason - did we really need another vehicle for showing Slytherins in the worst possible light? Why not have a Hufflepuff loyal to Umbridge, a Gryffindor who could bravely tackle anti-Umbridge trouble makers, or a Ravenclaw to cleverly think up ways of stopping students reading the Quibbler? By having only Slytherins side with Umbridge, it's the same bad=Slyhterin formula that some of us are starting to get fed up with. I also agree with Renee that I hope the 'good' Slytherin isn't just an exception to prove the rule, and that there isn't just the one, token nice student. It's time that we were shown what it is about Slytherin house that has justified its existence over the past 1000 years. Hannah From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Tue Nov 30 21:48:02 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2004 21:48:02 -0000 Subject: Slytherin House again. Was: Re: Problem with OotP? (was: Pampering) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118900 > Hannah: snip. > I also agree with Renee that I hope the 'good' Slytherin isn't just > an exception to prove the rule, and that there isn't just the one, > token nice student. It's time that we were shown what it is about > Slytherin house that has justified its existence over the past 1000 > years. Alla: JKR is really good in convincing me that Slytherin House is not to be liked, unless she is just playing of course. But I definitely agree with you and Renee - eleven years old as "lost causes" do start to annoy me. On the other hand, it is quite possible as someone recently pointed out that the only reason Slytherin House is allowed to exist is in order to keep all potentiall DE on display. If it is true, I don't like it at all. From hickengruendler at yahoo.de Tue Nov 30 21:55:24 2004 From: hickengruendler at yahoo.de (hickengruendler) Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2004 21:55:24 -0000 Subject: Problem with OotP? (was: Pampering) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118901 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Hannah" wrote: > > Del replied : > > I completely agree. > > > > I was particularly dismayed in OoP when not a single Slytherin > became > > a DA. That points only to 2 possibilities as far as I can see : > > > > - Students from Gryffindor, Ravenclaw and Hufflepuff don't > associate > > with the Slytherins. Or at least, those students that became DA > don't > > associate with Slytherins. > > > > - Some of the DA associate with some Slytherins but those DA > members > > didn't deem those Slytherins trustworthy enough to tell them about > the DA. > > > > In either case, it implies that Slytherin is indeed an evil House > out > > of which no good can come. Needless to say, I don't like it. And I > > REALLY hope a good Slytherin will integrate Harry's circle in HBP > (not > > necessarily the inner circle -the Group of 6-, but the DA for > example). > > Hannah: Yes, and add to that the 'evil' Inquisitorial Squad seems to > be made up entirely of Slytherins. Why? Is it because their > reputation preceded them, and Umbridge chose just Slytherins out of > the old fashioned house prejudice no doubt instilled into her as a > child at the school? Or was it because the only 'nasty' students in > the school happened to be in Slytherin? Hickengruendler: I disagree and would have been surprised if a Slytherin had become a DA member. IMO, Del's conclusion that Slytherin is indeed an evil house because they weren't in the DA isn't true, all it shows is, that the other houses don't trust them enough. And that shouldn't come as a surprise, since they were always anti Slytherin (and probably had some good reason, seeing how many of the Slytherins turned out to be). But the lack of trust does not necessarily have to mean that all Slytherins are evil, but also that the members of the other houses have to overcome their prejudices against them. About Hannah's point: Yes, the Squad contained only of Slytherins. But how many Slytherins were in this thread. I think 6 or 7 we know of. That's not much, and frankly, it are those who were portrayed as nasty from the very beginning. But there are still hundreds of Slytherin's who were not in the IS, and I think those are the really interesting ones. Especially Theodore Nott, who was not a member of the Squad although his father is a Death Eater, which suggests to me, that he's not a clone of his father, like Malfoy, Crabbe and Goyle are. Also, the betrayer of the DA was a Ravenclaw. Of course, if no Slytherin's are in the DA, than no Slytherins can betray it. But still, both Marietta's and Wormtail's example suggest, that future foes and candidates for betrayal are in all the houses. And there is one reason why I'm sure that we will see Slytherin become closer to the other houses: The Sorting Hat's New Song. If JKR didn't intend to have at least some Slytherins fight on Harry's side, than she wouldn't have included the song. It would be most awkward to rise such an important topic in the books and than totally ignore it. Hickengruendler From ginnysthe1 at yahoo.com Tue Nov 30 21:59:53 2004 From: ginnysthe1 at yahoo.com (ginnysthe1) Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2004 21:59:53 -0000 Subject: Trusting characters Re: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118902 > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, kim reynolds wrote: > > > > Small question for Kneasy: > > > > Lockhart on your list of untrustworthies --- is that because > > you think he may be faking his memory loss? > > > > Kim > >Kneasy replied: > No, but I do think that he'll recover and turn up again later > in the books. He was starting to show signs of doing so in the > St Mungo's scenes - and Lockhart being Lockhart, it's his ego > that comes to the surface first. > > I really can't see JKR wasting an entertaining character like him, > can you? Kim now: I need to go back and look at the chapter(s) in OotP where they visit Lockhart at St. Mungo's, because I still have the impression that there was something a little fishy about him not having his memory back yet. Anyhow, if he does get it back, he'll probably face repercussions over the lies he told in his books and the memory charms he used on unsuspecting wizards and witches, so maybe there's a reason he's recovering so slowly... But yes, as a character, I think he's great fun and I'd be sorry if OotP was his last appearance. Somehow I think he'll show up again too, maybe where we least expect it. Cheers, Kim From ejblack at rogers.com Tue Nov 30 22:13:43 2004 From: ejblack at rogers.com (Jeanette) Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2004 22:13:43 -0000 Subject: The Darkness Within In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118903 > > Alla wrote: > > Again, Dumbledore did say that Harry will be glad one day that he > saved Peter's life, so I am sure he is bound to do SOMETHING for > Harry, which will help him at the end, but I just don't see it >right now. 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. Jeanette From jferer at yahoo.com Tue Nov 30 22:21:48 2004 From: jferer at yahoo.com (Jim Ferer) Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2004 22:21:48 -0000 Subject: Slytherin House again. Was: Re: Problem with OotP? (was: Pampering) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118904 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "dumbledore11214" wrote: > > > Hannah: > > snip. > > > I also agree with Renee that I hope the 'good' Slytherin isn't just > > an exception to prove the rule, and that there isn't just the one, > > token nice student. It's time that we were shown what it is about > > Slytherin house that has justified its existence over the past 1000 > > years. > > > Alla: > > JKR is really good in convincing me that Slytherin House is not to be > liked, unless she is just playing of course. > > But I definitely agree with you and Renee - eleven years old as "lost > causes" do start to annoy me. > > On the other hand, it is quite possible as someone recently pointed > out that the only reason Slytherin House is allowed to exist is in > order to keep all potentiall DE on display. > > If it is true, I don't like it at all. We're only seeing a "wartime" context right now, and our window on things is really a peephole. The "good" Slytherins are bound to be more complex than some of the other "good" characters. We already have a "good" Slytherin: Snape. He still appears to be on the right side despite what a truly nasty person he is. The best analogy I can think of to our world is _The Apprentice_ (with Donald Trump - is it showing in the UK?) Just about all the "apprentices" are Slytherins. No easy reads there. JKR seems to intend it'll always be difficult to like a Slytherin, or at least that Slytherins will always be hard to figure out (hence the lack of trust - you'll have to let a Slytherin DA *know* what signing that parchment means.) Jim Ferer From ejblack at rogers.com Tue Nov 30 22:26:49 2004 From: ejblack at rogers.com (Jeanette) Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2004 22:26:49 -0000 Subject: Slytherin House again. Was: Re: Problem with OotP? (was: Pampering) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118905 > > > Alla wrote: > On the other hand, it is quite possible as someone recently pointed > out that the only reason Slytherin House is allowed to exist is in > order to keep all potentiall DE on display. > > If it is true, I don't like it at all. I can see not liking it but I can also see that it would be a very good idea on many levels. Often people are drawn to what they see as the "dark mysterious". If the wizards who seem to be headed that way are shut away from everyday life, not spoken of, are not just another fact of life, then they and the dark arts would have an added glamour. 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. Victor Krum is a case in point, one gets the feeling he did not see alot of non-dark wizards in his school/life, and when he did, he definitly preferred them. 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. Jeanette From elanorpam at yahoo.com.br Tue Nov 30 18:45:47 2004 From: elanorpam at yahoo.com.br (Paula "Elanor Pam") Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2004 16:45:47 -0200 Subject: Pronunciations (Re: Does Viktor Krum become an important character?) References: Message-ID: <00e601c4d70c$d0de1050$0301010a@home> No: HPFGUIDX 118906 Original Message From: "Renee" Ces: >> 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. << Renee: > 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. < Now Elanor Pam: As someone who studied linguistics for a year, I agree completely with Renee. I, for example, am brazilian and started studying english at 9. There were many english songs available for me to get pronounciation from (even though I wasn't into radio and my family's situation wasn't good enough to buy international vynils/CDs frequently!) and I always got very good grades in oral tests, but I'm well aware I write better than I speak. The teachers were brazilian as well, after all. Either way, english phonectics is relatively close to brazilian :/ Let's take another example: I can't blame my 100% japanese teacher for calling me "Paura-san" instead of "Paula-san" even though she's known me for 2 years. She's also been calling my classmate Glaubert "Guraruberuto" for these same 2 years. The point of this linguistical crap: Krum can't say Hermione. That's NOT his fault. His system just can't create certain sounds. Elanor Pam, who studied English, Spanish, is studying Japanese and shall tackle German next year. And that knows she won't for the life of her be able to make that german "R". From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Tue Nov 30 22:58:28 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2004 22:58:28 -0000 Subject: The Darkness Within In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118907 Jeane 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. Alla: Oh, yes, yes. THAT I can see. Maybe Peter will try to save his life and in the meanwhile unwillingly will save Harry's. Yes, Gollum-like event I can imagine. From jlnbtr at yahoo.com Tue Nov 30 21:43:28 2004 From: jlnbtr at yahoo.com (Juli) Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2004 13:43:28 -0800 (PST) Subject: Trusting characters Re: bullies? twins, padfoot and prongs In-Reply-To: <20041130200314.92084.qmail@web54107.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041130214328.26732.qmail@web53106.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 118908 > arrowsmithbt wrote: > ...edited... > 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 Juli: Nice list!, but I would change Sirius to the 'I trust' list, and I wouldn't trust Hagrid too much, I mean he's great and I'm sure he's not evil, but he's dumb, the next wild thing he brings home may be just too much to handle and he could place the students at risk. Peter? No way I trust him, he's evil, even worse than Lucius I think, the DEs kill mostly people they don't know or aren't related to, but to try to kill your best friend? That's just sick. Sirius, come on, the guy is great, he's loyal and I trust him. I would also like to include the entire Weasley family (except maybe Percy) to the 'I trust' list. I usually find it hard to trust people (at the beginnig of LOTR I didn't trust Gandalf), but the way JKR writes I feel like I know the characters and I trust them, why? Don't really know. Juli, thinking if I will be prove wrong. From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Tue Nov 30 23:00:19 2004 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2004 23:00:19 -0000 Subject: Slytherin House again. Was: Re: Problem with OotP? (was: Pampering) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118909 "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. From jlnbtr at yahoo.com Tue Nov 30 22:00:14 2004 From: jlnbtr at yahoo.com (Juli) Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2004 14:00:14 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Another Flint? (Was: When?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041130220014.93903.qmail@web53103.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 118910 > 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? Juli __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Meet the all-new My Yahoo! - Try it today! http://my.yahoo.com From jlnbtr at yahoo.com Tue Nov 30 21:55:34 2004 From: jlnbtr at yahoo.com (Juli) Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2004 13:55:34 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Problem with OotP? (was: Pampering) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041130215534.92172.qmail@web53103.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 118911 > Hannah: Yes, and add to that the 'evil' > Inquisitorial Squad seems to > be made up entirely of Slytherins. Why? Juli: 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...). Juli __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? All your favorites on one personal page Try My Yahoo! http://my.yahoo.com From jlnbtr at yahoo.com Tue Nov 30 23:09:48 2004 From: jlnbtr at yahoo.com (Juli) Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2004 15:09:48 -0800 (PST) Subject: Pronunciations (Re: Does Viktor Krum become an important character?) In-Reply-To: <00e601c4d70c$d0de1050$0301010a@home> Message-ID: <20041130230948.57399.qmail@web53106.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 118912 --- "Paula \"Elanor Pam\"" wrote: > > The point of this linguistical crap: Krum can't say > Hermione. That's NOT his > fault. His system just can't create certain sounds. I completely agree with you, I learnt English and Spanish at the same age (when I was a toddler), and even if I hear Spanish all day and it's my native language I can't pronounce the 'R', and I've tried. The same happened when I lived in France they couldn't pronounce the Spanish 'J'. I think Viktor did try to learn the pronunciation, he just isn't capable: language is learnt before the age 7, whatever sound you try to learn afterward it's just plain impossible (well, maybe not impossible but extremely difficult). Juli From ginnysthe1 at yahoo.com Tue Nov 30 23:26:33 2004 From: ginnysthe1 at yahoo.com (ginnysthe1) Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2004 23:26:33 -0000 Subject: Slytherin House again. Was: Re: Problem with OotP? (was: Pampering) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118913 > > Alla wrote: > > > On the other hand, it is quite possible as someone recently > pointed > > out that the only reason Slytherin House is allowed to exist is in > > order to keep all potentiall DE on display. > > > > If it is true, I don't like it at all. >Jeanette replied: >I can see not liking it but I can also see that it would be a very > good idea on many levels. Often people are drawn to what they see as > the "dark mysterious". If the wizards who seem to be headed that > way are shut away from everyday life, not spoken of, are not just > another fact of life, then they and the dark arts would have an > added glamour. > > 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. Victor Krum is a case in > point, one gets the feeling he did not see alot of non-dark wizards > in his school/life, and when he did, he definitly preferred them. > > 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. 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. Kim From gbannister10 at aol.com Tue Nov 30 23:30:18 2004 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2004 23:30:18 -0000 Subject: Pronunciations (Re: Does Viktor Krum become an important character?) In-Reply-To: <00e601c4d70c$d0de1050$0301010a@home> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118914 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Paula \"Elanor Pam\"" wrote: Elanor Pam: The point of this linguistical crap: Krum can't say Hermione. That's NOT his > fault. His system just can't create certain sounds. > > Elanor Pam, who studied English, Spanish, is studying Japanese and shall > tackle German next year. And that knows she won't for the life of her be > able to make that german "R". Geoff: Although I trained as a Maths teacher, I have always been very interested in languages and sometime wish that I had studied linguistics formally. My friends often comment on my knowledge of links between languages and I am that strange English phenomenon, a person who can take the Welsh "ll" in his stride. I did teach some German for some time as an extra subject and one of the problems with English pupils is, in addition to the guttural "r" to which Elanor Pam refers, is the "ch" sound, which also of course occurs in Welsh and Gaelic (Scots). Coming back to Krum, its not a question of him not producing certain sounds, he doesn't /read/ the name properly. He ignores the "i", as if it is spelt "Hermonine" after being coached by the lady in question at the Yule Ball; I think his earlier rendering as "Hermy- own" was a bit nearer the mark. Those of us who are old enough to remember the great English actress Hermione Gingold would never make that mistake. :-) From ginnysthe1 at yahoo.com Tue Nov 30 23:58:57 2004 From: ginnysthe1 at yahoo.com (ginnysthe1) Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2004 23:58:57 -0000 Subject: Pronunciations (Re: Does Viktor Krum become an important character?) In-Reply-To: <20041130230948.57399.qmail@web53106.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 118915 >"Paula \"Elanor Pam\"" > wrote: > > The point of this linguistical crap: Krum can't say > > Hermione. That's NOT his > > fault. His system just can't create certain sounds. Juli replied: > I completely agree with you, I learnt English and > Spanish at the same age (when I was a toddler), and > even if I hear Spanish all day and it's my native > language I can't pronounce the 'R', and I've tried. > The same happened when I lived in France they couldn't > pronounce the Spanish 'J'. I think Viktor did try to > learn the pronunciation, he just isn't capable: > language is learnt before the age 7, whatever sound > you try to learn afterward it's just plain impossible > (well, maybe not impossible but extremely difficult). Now Kim: 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. I think in one of her interviews she was delighted at the way even native-English speakers had problems pronouncing the name Hermione, and maybe she wanted to put something funny like it in the book. Nevertheless, I definitely agree that it's hard for every learner of a foreign language to pronounce every sound correctly, partly because, as you've all said, those particular sounds don't exist in the learner's native language, so their tongue gets tied up trying to make the new sound, and partly because they also don't hear the sound's difference from a similar sound in their native language (also as someone said previously). I've studied quite a few languages over the years and I never became even close to native-sounding when I spoke them. But I did improve with time and practice. The language I was "most native" at was Spanish because I started it at the earliest age (age 12). I think the capacity to learn a second language fluently and to sound like a native really starts to diminish after the age of 12 (if I recall what I heard in linguistics class correctly). A third thing that may happen for a foreign speaker is something I witnessed teaching English to Chinese students. They had the hardest time with the (American) English "th" sound because it required them to stick their tongues out between their teeth and they thought doing that was rude! I told them it wouldn't look rude to English native- speakers, but no go! They'd try everything they could to make the sound without sticking out their tongues (e.g. using "f" or "t" instead) so finally I just gave up. A word's context tends to be more important for being understood than perfect pronunciation anyhow (IMO). Anyway, it would be nice to know if there's a Bulgarian (like Viktor) on this list to see what they think of his foibles with pronouncing "Hermione." Cheers, Kim From nienna_anwamane at ntlworld.com Mon Nov 15 21:03:33 2004 From: nienna_anwamane at ntlworld.com (nienna_anwamane) Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2004 21:03:33 -0000 Subject: Hogwarts letters Re: Choosing sides References: Message-ID: <001001c4cb56$92c7a540$e14dfea9@talyn> No: HPFGUIDX 119941 Annette: > 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? <<< 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. "nienna_anwamane" From nienna_anwamane at ntlworld.com Sat Nov 27 13:51:47 2004 From: nienna_anwamane at ntlworld.com (joanne mcnamee) Date: Sat, 27 Nov 2004 13:51:47 -0000 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Hermione In Trouble? References: Message-ID: <012d01c4d488$3e671400$f5606b51@talyn> No: HPFGUIDX 120635 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. --Joanne I'm normally not a praying man, but if you're up there, please save me Superman- Homer Simpson [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]